Caution: Higher education at work

13 thoughts on “Caution: Higher education at work”

  1. So, education’s purpose.

    It was education’s purpose to progressively damage marriage, teach children that their parents are wrong, teach that only teachers have authority, and to give homosexuals the right to control the other 99%.


    At what cost?

    Right now? $200,000 per tax paying citizen. So much debt, the 99% will never get out of it.

    I think education was wrong. It’s purpose was supposed to be about teaching, not about economic enslavement.


      1. I don’t.

        I was discriminated against, because I am seen as a ‘white male.’ I survived. And I flourish. But, that has little to do with my education and much to do with my faith.

  2. All the trouble in the world… Well, maybe not all, but certainly a good deal of the trouble in the world would be eliminated if control freaks didn’t believe they were smart enough to prohibit or mandate things that everybody else must and must not do.

    If we were made in God’s image, we’d all be invisible.

      1. Not to put too fine a point on it, but notice the sequence of comments and the fact that I commented right after reading Wayne’s blog entries wherein he admonishes us all against leaving behind the pox ridden, Spanish Inquisition laden, physical and mental poverty of the 11th century and it’s humanely inspired means of separating the living from dead witches and those possessed by the devil.

  3. Once upon a time, probably back when “gay” meant light-hearted and carefree, the term “liberal education” was common. That meant an open-minded and free-ranging exposure to the full panoply of Western Civilization including its accumulated philosophy, history and literature. These days, even though the context is different, the term “liberal” is a pejorative to about half the citizenry. However, Mr. Bruni’s excellent piece here (thanks, PT) causes me to think that perhaps the context is not so different after all. Here in this country one can choose to snuggle down in the embrace of smug theism that purports to have all the answers, or to embrace a heady exposure to a smorgasbord of wisdom and knowledge from all quarters. But those who choose the former are abandoning their intellectual autonomy to people quite possibly more fallible than themselves. That is true in either case, the political or the educational.

    1. Why not explore “the heady exposure” of education before making any decisions? Then you can embrace the theism (or anything else), if you choose, confident that you’ve made an informed decision, the best possible decision for you.

  4. To me, dunking a kid’s head in the cesspool of religion, before they’ve developed anything like to the intellectual armament they need to guard their sanity, is about the worst form of child abuse there is. A great post PT, and kudos to Jim and IMA for their excellent comments too!

    1. I think it’s okay for parents to get in their religious two cents’ worth when the kids are young, as long as the kids aren’t bludgeoned with it (kids tend to emulate their parents anyway). The Golden Rule, for example, is a pretty good idea whether you’re religious or not. But it seems to me the goal should be preparing children to think for themselves and make their own decisions when they leave home.

      It occurs to me that kids don’t turn away from religion because of college “indoctrination,” as Santorum claims. Kids turn away then (whether they’re in college or not) because it’s their first time away from home and their first opportunity to make their own independent decisions.

... and that's my two cents