The Purpose of Education

It seems to me that in an earlier age, higher education served a higher purpose.  There were trade schools, which trained the lower classes the skills needed for skilled labor, but for the upper class, education had a broader mandate: to teach the student how to live.

Granted, the upper reaches of academia were reserved for the sons and daughters of the upper crust, and those in that situation, through birth and connections, were assured of a good position on graduation, so long as they did nothing to blatantly indicate unfitness.  And so preparation for a job, per se, was not entirely necessary.  Instead, one learned the classics, and received a deep and thorough grounding in literatures and philosophy.  An undergraduate education provided the breadth, and graduate school provided the depth in a specific field of choosing.

It seems to me that in recent years, the point of undergraduate education has shifted.  There is no longer an aim to teach the student how to live, and how the world works.  Instead, it is all about job preparation.  In a sense, we are now all in trade school.

From kindergarten through college, the focus is on getting a job.  And while becoming a productive individual is certainly of value to society, I wonder if something has gotten lost in the process.

I encounter too many educated people these days who haven’t learned to think logically.  Too many who cannot write clearly.  An inability to write clearly is, I believe, an inability to think clearly.  For what is thought made of, but words?

At a dinner party the other night, I heard a contradictory perspective.  A friend who had graduated with a liberal arts degree (I don’t know, off hand, in what subject) was bemoaning the difficulties she has had in life due to the fact that college did not prepare her for any specific job.

There must be a balance.  At the risk of raising the bar for new graduates, perhaps there needs to be a new standard.  Perhaps the master’s is the new bachelor’s.  Perhaps undergraduate education should be about establishing that grounding in the humanities -- that is, what it is to be a human.  And graduate school should be about depth in a particular field.

Why the federal government should invest in cities

There are many reasons why Obama, in his second term, should start investing heavily in cities.

1) WPA 2.0

There are many WPA style projects that could really benefit the unemployed, while also benefiting cities. These projects would put people to work, and help rebuild the economy while also strengthening our cities.

2) Why cities?

Because that's where 80% of the people live, and that's where the wealth is created.

http://digg.com/newsbar/topnews/why_is_the_u_s_wealthier_than_europe

Also, it is more environmentally friendly (ironically) to centralize people in cities, rather than having them spread out in suburbs or in the countryside. Leaves more open space for the critters.

3) A couple projects that come to mind:

a) Put cables Underground

Already some neighborhoods (mostly the rich ones) have their cables underground. But this should be done throughout all our cities. Federal money could be put towards this effort. All neighborhoods would become more beautiful. This would help attract people to cities, and retain them there (rather than fleeing to the burbs).

b) More smart traffic signals

A hybrid vehicle recycles energy from braking. But all cars, hybrid and non, would be even more efficient if they could avoid needless stops. Smart traffic signals would both improve traffic flow, and provide better fuel economy.

c) Free public transportation

Think how many more people would take public transport if it were free. One may ask: how can a city afford this? The same way it affords to pave streets, and man the fire department. Taxes. However by making public transport free, there will be less traffic and parking congestion, and the increase in people living in the city (because it's a more attractive place to be, what with the underground wires and free public transport) will provide a larger tax base with which to fund free public transport. I once heard Gavin Newsom propose this idea, and it blew my mind.

I hope these are the sort of things Obama does in his second term. That would be a great legacy.