Yes, a comic book hero did comic book hero things in a comic book hero movie. Not sure what point you think you're making.

The point is to demonstrate that if a fictional character in a work of fiction does X and it works out, that does not serve as evidence that a real person doing X will work out in reality.

You can't read a book and understand it unless you pay someone to sit in a class and tell you how to think about what you read?

Do you understand the distinction between "does not serve as evidence" and "serves as evidence against"?

Now in fact it is possible to learn from self-directed study. But your odds of learning are massively better when you get to ask questions, test your understanding by talking with others, and have your ability to explain your understanding graded.

Which means that, on average, people get more value out of going through a book in a classroom setting than they get by reading it on their own.

Whether that is enough value to justify tuition is another story entirely...

Well, that just because it's in a movie doesn't mean it's true.

Few people would get to any sort of level of understanding of that sort of material just by reading it, and just because a movie genius can do it doesn't mean it's easy.

If we replaced all those examples with engineering textbooks, wouldn't it be the exact same, if it not, why? We learn he's an untrained math prodigy later on in the movie, so he doesn't need any education. It would appear a STEM education is a waste as well.

So in order to understand something, you need to a.) and then b.) have someone tell you how to think about what you read? While paying them? You can't wrestle with deep and complex topics unless someone tells you how to think?

Not at all, but having someone who can provide context sure helps with a lot of works - often these works are building on centuries or millennia of thought that they may assume you're aware of and that help place the arguments.

Again I ask, given that textbooks exist, can you make the argument that STEM is any different?

As a STEM major at a large public university, my classmates and I decided that at a meta-level, STEM majors learned how to learn new and complicated things quickly in order to get good grades in classes. Also, as a STEM major, I found attending class less than helpful most of the time. I do remember spending quite a lot of time in either a computer lab or in the library fighting my way through problems. Math, physics, chem, programming. Attending lectures was largely someone regurgitating either slides or a textbook.

I assumed this was true for most people in STEM majors in college, no?

> STEM majors learned how to learn new and complicated things quickly in order to get good grades in classes.

That's a skill that the liberal arts pick up as well.

> I do remember spending quite a lot of time in either a computer lab or in the library fighting my way through problems.

Will did that all on his own, without the need for a college. You're also describing a technical institute.

I don't see any skills there that really require a university either.

I didn't realize we were in violent agreement. I posted a fun quote from a movie I like that was relevant to the parent. You replied with a touch of snark and I felt compelled to defend myself from your comment. And now here we are. Heh.