In the Republican debate on Tuesday, senator Marco Rubio said the following: "We need more welders and less philosophers."
If the point Rubio was trying to drive home is that we need more people in stable, well-paying jobs, I agree -- but I don't think he articulated it properly.
His statement, in my opinion, smacks of anti-intellectualism.
As I've stated in many of my posts, we live in a time where being intellectually-driven puts you in the minority. Conversing about the solar system or the American Revolution isn't as "cool" or easy as talking about the Kardashians.
One thing a social psychology professor I had in college once told my class that has since stayed firmly etched in my mind: Human beings are cognitive misers; we are naturally inclined to waste as few mental resources as possible.
Is it any wonder, then, that most people can't name the capitals of five U.S. states? Or that many don't know when the Civil War took place and who fought in it?
I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the United States as least, most people seem to believe that learning stops after you earn your bachelor's degree, and that the rest of your life should only be spent earning money.
Newsflash, Mr. Rubio: There are people out there like me who actually enjoy learning for its own sake. I read history, psychology, and marketing books for leisure. And, eventually, I do aim to work in higher education. I consider myself a philosopher -- an intellectual -- and I'm proud of it.
Mind you, this argument should not be seen as reflecting my political views. I am staunchly pro-education, no matter what my political leanings are. If a Democrat had made the statement, I would have come out and questioned it as vehemently as I am now.
In sum, I am all for jobs and making good money. After all, Americans live in a capitalistic society where having a great job, car, and home constitutes living the American dream. However, politicians like Rubio needn't forget that many Americans have reached that point thanks in large part to the opportunities that an education has afforded them.
Do you agree or disagree with Rubio? Do you view his statement as knocking education and, more broadly, intellectualism?
If the point Rubio was trying to drive home is that we need more people in stable, well-paying jobs, I agree -- but I don't think he articulated it properly.
His statement, in my opinion, smacks of anti-intellectualism.
As I've stated in many of my posts, we live in a time where being intellectually-driven puts you in the minority. Conversing about the solar system or the American Revolution isn't as "cool" or easy as talking about the Kardashians.
One thing a social psychology professor I had in college once told my class that has since stayed firmly etched in my mind: Human beings are cognitive misers; we are naturally inclined to waste as few mental resources as possible.
Is it any wonder, then, that most people can't name the capitals of five U.S. states? Or that many don't know when the Civil War took place and who fought in it?
I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the United States as least, most people seem to believe that learning stops after you earn your bachelor's degree, and that the rest of your life should only be spent earning money.
Newsflash, Mr. Rubio: There are people out there like me who actually enjoy learning for its own sake. I read history, psychology, and marketing books for leisure. And, eventually, I do aim to work in higher education. I consider myself a philosopher -- an intellectual -- and I'm proud of it.
Mind you, this argument should not be seen as reflecting my political views. I am staunchly pro-education, no matter what my political leanings are. If a Democrat had made the statement, I would have come out and questioned it as vehemently as I am now.
In sum, I am all for jobs and making good money. After all, Americans live in a capitalistic society where having a great job, car, and home constitutes living the American dream. However, politicians like Rubio needn't forget that many Americans have reached that point thanks in large part to the opportunities that an education has afforded them.
Do you agree or disagree with Rubio? Do you view his statement as knocking education and, more broadly, intellectualism?
Comments
He wants action not words.
The problem with Government has ALWAYS been that it tends to create committees and subcommittees and sub-sub committees to debate issues and then these bring their findings into the House of Representatives and the Senate and THEY argue the subject for awhile and then it goes back into committees to iron out the differences between what the House thinks should be done and what the Senate thinks should be done and then goes back to Congress to be argued about some more,
Meanwhile nothing is getting DONE.
(And this assumes that partisan politics isn't too heavily invested in the issue).
Finally Congress approves a bill which goes to the President who may sign it, or veto it, or send it back for revision.
Rubio is Action Man.
Not, I think, anti-intellectual.