Why Debate

[Credo in Deum]

We de bate so we can catch de fish!

[Catherine Therese]

I think that the background has to be set as one that elevates utilitarian production over anything else. As a country, we no longer find intrinsic value in education. Getting a college degree is a utilitarian calculation to get a better paying job. 

 

That being said, I think the devaluation of the social sciences and philosophy springs from the fact that they are embedded in our everyday actions. We do not want to be told that our views on politics (social and economic) are silly and uninformed. Instead of John Milbank's incredible argument against same-sex marriage, we get people like Rick Santorium. We do not want a smart President. We want a president who is just as dumb as we are. 

 

You made the comment "as a country"... I agree with you and would suggest further that I think this utilitarian approach to education extends across the entire developed world, Eastern and Western cultures alike, while we're talking on a level of generalities.  

 

I think in many ways this was a market-driven phenomenon in the late 90s onwards, with employers stating a recruiting preference for graduates with targeted vocational education, such as an engineering degree, or a teaching degree, rather than graduates with well-rounded degrees in liberal arts, social sciences, etc. We're suffering the educational hangover from those market demands but from what I've seen at least here, there may be some hope that employers are coming around and looking rather for well-rounded thinkers with transferrable skill sets. Perhaps we'll see shifts in the education sector accordingly very soon?