God Damn General Education Requirements!

[Greenday]

Why? You don't think people should actually learn that their view is sometimes not the only one, but also their stance is unsound? To learn that opposing viewpoints might actually have far more merit than their own? Or to actually learn to defend in a real way their own opinions? And also, to possibly find out that what they've been thinking isn't all that new and novel? If it's done right, it does change people's attitudes!

I'm taking Intro to Philosophy to get rid of one of my humanities requirements. Here's some of the stuff I learned:

In 1651, Hobbs said that it's human nature to be selfish. We need government so things don't get out of control...Wow, I never would have guessed that before. I thought humans were always selfless. Give me a break. No offense to Hobbs, but this is something I figured out as a kid.

In 370 BCE, Plato said women can be equal to men! Gee, no shit? I don't need to study what some guy said thousands of years ago to know that.

It's nice to know that people of ancient times had some common sense. And even on the stuff they were wrong with, they at least had reasons for what they believed. But there's no reason for me to have to learn about these specific people.

[Slytovhand]

In 370 BCE, Plato said women can be equal to men!

Actually, if you read Phaedrus, while he indicated that men and women should be equal, men would always be superior in all aspects of life....I was going to do a paper called "Why Socrates was a mysogynisitic pig"... but changed to something else instead (ahh... too many choices!)

Greenday, that depends on what and how it's taught. So, while I agree that learning times and dates in philosophy is a waste of time, there are also some rather significant ideas going on as well...

[Greenday]

Greenday, that depends on what and how it's taught. So, while I agree that learning times and dates in philosophy is a waste of time, there are also some rather significant ideas going on as well...

So if I'm going to be force-fed philosophy, shouldn't it be relevant to something? Seriously, I'd sit around and philosophize all day if I could. I love doing it. I just don't care about what someone thousands of years ago said. I acknowledge it got us where we are today, but studying their philosophies isn't going to be that relevant for me. At least gives us more new philosophers. Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and David Hume were the only relevant philosophers we barely mentioned in class. Meanwhile we spent weeks on Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Locke (who was an idealistic moron in my opinion), Descartes, and Hobbs (probably the most relevant of the older ones).

[KabeRinnaul]

Why? You don't think people should actually learn that their view is sometimes not the only one, but also their stance is unsound? To learn that opposing viewpoints might actually have far more merit than their own? Or to actually learn to defend in a real way their own opinions? And also, to possibly find out that what they've been thinking isn't all that new and novel? If it's done right, it does change people's attitudes!

Because after hearing someone explain for ten minutes that a chair is not the ideal chair, only a chair-like object which our mind compares to the ideal of the chair, I really start to wonder when or if they're actually going to say anything.

All that other stuff can be picked up from other sources. Philosophy mainly just teaches you how to have a really, really pointless argument.

[AdminAssistant]

Because after hearing someone explain for ten minutes that a chair is not the ideal chair, only a chair-like object which our mind compares to the ideal of the chair, I really start to wonder when or if they're actually going to say anything.

Aw, I like The Republic!

[Slytovhand]

Sure, Metaphysics and Epistemology might be fairly irrelevant, but what about Ethics? Political Philosophy? And, of course, Critical Reasoning? (two subjects I didn't get to in my degree - Environmental Philosophy - but from a non-moralistic viewpoint, and Philosophy of Science - no, just cos it's 'science' doesn't mean it's always right!)

[Rageaholic]

I have two equally qualified job applicants. One is smartly and neatly dressed in business attire. The other is wearing wrinkled khakis, a t-shirt, and ratty tennis shoes. Sorry, I'm going to hire the one who is more professional. That's not BS.

It is BS, just like most of the interview process. You have to sell yourself and to sell yourself, you gotta BS.

And I hardly see how clothing choice has to do with being professional. If you're talking about the image of being professional, I'll agree (selling yourself), but I don't think it actually means that one person is more professional than another because of the way their dressed. It's all about perception.

There are a lot of ways to pay for college, if you're willing to look. Pell grants, scholarships, student loans, etc.

Those probably help, but aren't there usually strings attached?

Oh, please. A major consists of approximately 50 credit hours of class. 18 hours barely qualifies as a minor. I feel your pain, but I have to call out your hyperbole.

If you add up all the GE requirements, it does add up to 50. And the humanities are a minor (I think 15 credit hours are a minor in my school) Can't ONE course be enough?

The whole problem with GE is that it's forcing people to take courses they aren't interested in. This wouldn't be so bad if it was just a few courses, like ONE anthropology, ONE science, ONE english, but they have to make it nearly half of your credits (assuming your going for a bachlors degree, which requires a minimum of 120 credit hours). It's too specific, as if you were actually going to minor in some of that stuff. Perhap it varies with the university, but from what I hear, the idea is still there, half of the courses you gotta take no matter what you're going into. The student should have more say in what to minor into. I would like to minor into computers, but I'm still trying to fill the GE crap and that's what's got me so pissed off about this.

And I'm not saying the high school's aren't to blame either. They should teach the basic GE stuff so the colleges don't have to. On the other hand, why should I have to know that much unrelated material just to be an accountant one day?

[jackfaire]

Everyone just watch Accepted says it all better than anyone else could.

[Greenday]

Graduating with a major and a minor. 125 credits. And 3 of those credits are just so I'm considered full time next semester so I can keep health insurance.

My required GEs:

2 Writing Courses (6 credits)
1 Art Course (3 credits)
1 Communications/Public Speaking (3 credits)
2 Behavioral/Social Sciences (6 credits)
2 Humanities (Philosophy/Literature/History Pick 2, can't be 2 of the same) (6 credits)
1 Interdisciplinary (3 credits)
1 Diverse Communities (3 credits)
3 Writing Emphasis (cannot be a writing course) (9 credits)

That doesn't include the 3 credits of math required because I had to take Calc I & II which covered that and 6 credits of science which my entire major and minor cover.

So that's 39 credits of GEs, 48 if you count math and science. Ridiculous waste. Luckily I was smart enough to combine stuff such as taking a class that was diversity and social science. Art and writing emphasis. Still sucks.

[guywithashovel]

When I was in college, I took two philosophy courses. In addition, when I was in graduate school, I took Ethical Concerns for Information Professionals, which was kind of a philosophy course---we did, after all, utilize the thoughts of some famous philosophers. We just applied them to the library and information professions.

I enjoyed these courses. I especially appreciated the logic and critical thinking course I took in college. That course really helped me analyze the world more critically. Also, the textbook used examples from newspapers, news broadcasts, talk shows, and other pop culture venues to demonstrate the principles being taught. This got me to read newspapers and other news sources more often. So, in short, it sharpened my ability to critically analyze information, and it got me to pay more attention to current events, which in turn made me more informed about society.

As for studying other branches of philosophy, it has its merits. I know it can be taxing on your stamina to read the musings of some long dead guy who seems to have been overly obsessed with writing long-winded blurbs describing his opinions of the world. However, doing this can sometimes help you consider certain aspects of life that you might not have otherwise considered. This may or may not be beneficial to you career-wise, and it's certainly not something everyone would enjoy doing, though.

[AdminAssistant]

Those probably help, but aren't there usually strings attached?

For scholarships, it depends. For the one I had in undergrad, I had to maintain a 3.5 GPA, take honors classes, occasionally write a letter of thanks to the donors, and write an honors thesis. Private scholarships may have different requirements, like taking certain classes or participating in certain activities. A colleague currently on a fellowship to write her dissertation has to send in a report on her progress every few months. To quote one of my professors, "It all depends."

Any kind of financial aid is going to have some kind of GPA stipulation, just to make sure the students receiving the funds are actually going to classes. Many public funds will base the amount you receive off of your FERPA score (i.e. how much money you make). In other words, if you want to go to college and get Uncle Sam to help you pay for it, get the hell off your parents' taxes. Like, yesterday.

If you add up all the GE requirements, it does add up to 50. And the humanities are a minor (I think 15 credit hours are a minor in my school) Can't ONE course be enough?

One humanities course? To cover English, Linguistics/Languages, Civics, Philosophy, Ethics, Arts, History, and Social Sciences? Not possible.

Look, I know you see it as a pain in the ass. I thought taking Physics, Biology, Sociology, Psychology, and Algebra were a pain in the ass. Looking back, I gained something from each class, and I've even used some of it. Frankly, I would want accountants to have to take a few ethics courses.

[Slytovhand]

Ummm.. just thought I'd mention. In this here college I'm teaching (HA!) at, the freshmen have to do PE classes. They actually get graded on things like volleyball and basketball, and for doing TaiChiChuan and Kung Fu!!! Oh, and ping pong!

They've also got other electives - like calligraphy, yoga, a stack of martial arts (different forms - including weapons), dance classes, etc etc ect!!! (I wanna join!!!! Esp the Fencing Styles class - yes - swords! )

[Greenday]

I'm taking Tai Chi next semester as my filler...3 credits and it's graded

[linguist]

if i'm remembering correctly, you're studying to go into forensics? while i agree not all of these are directly related, i still feel they're all necessary to a well-rounded education, but i disagree that all of the courses you listed are inapplicable to your chosen field:

2 Writing Courses (6 credits)

you'll never have to prepare reports?

1 Communications/Public Speaking (3 credits)

you'll never have to testify in court, making sure you can effectively and clearly communicate to those who don't have your level of technical expertise? as for that, if you're really good at your job the time may come when you'd be asked to present at conferences.

2 Behavioral/Social Sciences (6 credits)

you're honestly going to say that behavioral science has nothing to do with criminology or forensics?

2 Humanities (Philosophy

critical reasoning, logic, and ethics have nothing to do with your field?

3 Writing Emphasis (cannot be a writing course) (9 credits)

i refer you again to the preparation of effective reports.

[Greenday]

As far as writing goes, I've done a hell of a lot more writing in my chem labs than any writing course or writing emphasis class. And my chem teachers are a lot more harsh on our writing than any other teacher I had. It'd be great if I had to take a writing class that was relevant to writing scientifically but sadly they don't offer that. Plus I've been a damn good writer since junior year of high school when I got special help from one of my teachers.

Public Speaking, eh, I learned a lil but then I had this class Chemistry Seminar where we had to prepare and give a 20 minute seminar, then make a poster for presentation as if it was a convention and be able to explain everything. More of that would have been useful. A class on testifying for court would have been actually useful instead of Public Speaking.

More criminology would have been helpful than intro to sociology and politics of diversity (Which my teacher thought was a crap class so he just taught politics. I understand race/gender/etc. plays a part in politics, there's nothing to teach me about that.)

I've had ethics and critical thinking shoved down my throat by my chem teachers. One humanities class down and I didn't learn anything remotely useful.

I can go all day, really.