USA Politics

[krummholz]

I think it's a common refrain from conservatives that science equates with the way it can be used in the worse cases. I also find it suspect because I think they're trying to smuggle in the necessity for Christian morality. But, I do think they're onto something about humanities - it means the classics generally, including the study of history by various "objective" methods. When I was out the door of university, the "cultural studies" graduate program was coming in. I was young and knew nothing and those graduate students were into Foucault and proclaiming their Marxism in a calculated but nonchalant manner. I had a history professor named Kopf that I really liked and I remember that he really complained about it like it was replacing history. I thought, "it's all heading in the same direction, isn't it?" But critical theory, and the like, is really a different world view than liberal humanism, which is the foundation of the humanities I think.

Yes, that's an odd twist. When I was growing up, it was mostly environmentalists - who are (were) by and large left of center politically - who equated science with the worst crimes against nature and humanity perpetrated with its help.

I guess I agree that humanities as taught today has largely thrown out the classics in favor of a post-modern approach. And that the folks responsible are predominantly on the left. So clearly it depends on how you define "the humanities". Left-leaning media certainly don't give short shrift to art of all kinds, including music - NPR here in the US frequently has shows featuring interviewers with musicians all across the spectrum.

I also agree with the National Review piece that exposure to ideas on all sides of the spectrum in universities today has been largely thwarted by e.g. allowing students veto power over guest speakers with views deemed offensive. That's something I consider to be inconsistent with the goal of a university to teach students to think critically. I'm lucky in that I teach in a STEM field, so I rarely see that in my day to day life here, but I know that it's quite real.

[71 dB]

I was unaware racism could be ranked in such a manner.  I learned something new today.

Anyway, here's Chomsky in a Q&A on the subject.  It's on YouTube, so it's legit:

https://www.youtube.com/v/KftHGpJjPBo

Anything can be ranked. I heard the claim that South Africa is the most racist country in the World from a smart South African Youtuber who studied physics in Finland in University for a year. The whites and blacks REALLY hate each other in South Africa so this claim makes sense.

Maybe I check out the video, but now I go to sauna.

[Todd]

Anything can be ranked.

It has been written on GMG, therefore it is true.

[Herman]

I guess I agree that humanities as taught today has largely thrown out the classics in favor of a post-modern approach. And that the folks responsible are predominantly on the left. So clearly it depends on how you define "the humanities". Left-leaning media certainly don't give short shrift to art of all kinds, including music - NPR here in the US frequently has shows featuring interviewers with musicians all across the spectrum.

Is your idea that 'the classics have been thrown out' based on first hand knowledge?
Are you a college student, or a professor in a college?
Or is this some hearsay story?
The classics (always a moving target) are still on the curriculum; the only thing that's changed is the generation of professors in tweed who used to say Huck Finn was a fine fellow and Keats' poetry is 'all you need to know', i.e. the kind of Dead Poets' Society professor who tells you how to live your life has long retired and just like there's a different generation of undergraduates, there is a different generation of professors. Though for all I know there are still some Dead Poets' Society professors out there, too.
Your observation that liberal folks tend to be more interested in books and the arts ought to have given you some pause.

[Jo498]

Question. Who are "they" in these sentences?

No, I don't believe in a sinister plot and maybe school education has suffered more than university. I am a fan of the idea that stupidity is usually sufficient and no evil motives. In education it is obviously more complicated. People correctly thought that more education was generally good and also that there should not be unfair exclusion of "lower classes" from higher ed, and in the 60s it was also true that for economical reasons more people with university degrees (or other qualified educations) were needed. But in many cases the baby was thrown out with the bathwater by zealous or overtaxed bureaucrats and/or by pedagogy professors with very little teaching/classroom experience. All of it was also informed by  false anthropology, i.e. all nurture and almost no nature. So it is a host of factors and bad combinations of factors. There might be great models for "integrating" children with learning disabilities or other challenges that work in small groups with additional teaching personnel but utterly fail when transferred to larger classes and lack of money for additional teachers etc. Then there is a very simple low hanging fruit phenomenon. When a country starts with 5-10% or so of a cohort with a college or advanced degree in the 60s there are probably benefits in doubling or tripling that percentage. But when this has been achieved after a generation one has got almost all who are capable of attaining a degree. Doubling the number again will be a bad move because it destroys the value of such degrees by making them too easy to get and so employers will look for additional qualifications. And the latter will usually be far more unfairly distributed in a population than the degrees were a generation earlier because exchange years in the US or internships with daddies cronies law firm or whatever are by nature unequally distributed.

[BasilValentine]

In this era, what is even the point of going to school for music? Everything you need to know is available online.

I'm glad I never went to school for music. I can make more than enough money at 40 hours/week by not choosing music as my major to afford my expensive music hobby. And have time left over for that. If I went to school for music, I'd be working 80 hours a week at soul-crushing low tier jobs to pay off my debt, and ironically, not have time to write music, defeating the entire point.

I really don't think anyone should get in debt for a degree that has a low, or nonexistent ROI. Loans shouldn't even be an option. You can do it if you're rich and want to. Otherwise, online education is just as good.

Also, one thing that music school doesn't teach is how to have good creative instinct. You can learn all about every single aspect of music theory, but if you don't have good creative instinct, it's not going to turn out well.

The fact that you didn't go to school for music is pretty obvious from the second sentence of your post. If you think all a serious student of music needs can be found online, you clearly have no idea about what goes on in music schools and conservatories. 

[71 dB]

It has been written on GMG, therefore it is true.

Rankings can be just someone's subjective opinions such as "my top 10 composers are..."

[drogulus]

Your observation that liberal folks tend to be more interested in books and the arts ought to have given you some pause.

     Keynes, a philosopher and social theorist who made a contribution to economics, thought that it would be good if workers had the leisure to appreciate life the way he did. He hypothesized that if the working class had the opportunity to assume the values associated with middle class aspirations, the opportunity would not be wasted. Keynes didn't live long enough to see his idea vindicated on a massive scale.

[Todd]

Rankings can be just someone's subjective opinions such as "my top 10 composers are..."

Interesting.

[71 dB]

Interesting.

Isn't it? The word "ranking" isn't a synonym for "scientifically proven fact."

[krummholz]

Is your idea that 'the classics have been thrown out' based on first hand knowledge?
Are you a college student, or a professor in a college?
Or is this some hearsay story?
The classics (always a moving target) are still on the curriculum; the only thing that's changed is the generation of professors in tweed who used to say Huck Finn was a fine fellow and Keats' poetry is 'all you need to know', i.e. the kind of Dead Poets' Society professor who tells you how to live your life has long retired and just like there's a different generation of undergraduates, there is a different generation of professors. Though for all I know there are still some Dead Poets' Society professors out there, too.
Your observation that liberal folks tend to be more interested in books and the arts ought to have given you some pause.

I'm a professor in a college - but NOT in a humanities field (as I said), so my viewpoint may not be valid. What I wrote was my impression from readings from many sources. Maybe my statement was too strong - I agree the classics haven't been completely "thrown out", but everything I've seen in the past 20 years or so (including at my current university, from a perusal of the catalog over the last 6 years) is that postmodernism has become a strong influence on the curriculum.

I don't see how that is inconsistent with what I said about NPR, which wasn't that they (being liberal-leaning) were more interested in books and the arts (than who? conservatives?), but that they don't appear to hate the humanities at all. It is true, of course, that they give more attention to popular music than classical... but then again, they are PUBLIC radio, so that isn't surprising.

[Todd]

Isn't it? The word "ranking" isn't a synonym for "scientifically proven fact."

I do not believe anyone wrote that was the case. 

It is good to know that some people believe anything can be ranked.  That is helpful knowledge.

[Todd]

Now back to US politics:

From AmPo: Don't fall for filibuster abolition. It's a trap.

Schumer must ignore Levin.

[71 dB]

I do not believe anyone wrote that was the case. 

It is good to know that some people believe anything can be ranked.  That is helpful knowledge.

But you don't rank it the most helpful knowledge? 

[Karl Henning]

In this era, what is even the point of going to school for music? Everything you need to know is available online.

Because the study of music is not at all as narrow a matter as "what you need to know."

[milk]

Yes, that's an odd twist. When I was growing up, it was mostly environmentalists - who are (were) by and large left of center politically - who equated science with the worst crimes against nature and humanity perpetrated with its help.

I guess I agree that humanities as taught today has largely thrown out the classics in favor of a post-modern approach. And that the folks responsible are predominantly on the left. So clearly it depends on how you define "the humanities". Left-leaning media certainly don't give short shrift to art of all kinds, including music - NPR here in the US frequently has shows featuring interviewers with musicians all across the spectrum.

I also agree with the National Review piece that exposure to ideas on all sides of the spectrum in universities today has been largely thwarted by e.g. allowing students veto power over guest speakers with views deemed offensive. That's something I consider to be inconsistent with the goal of a university to teach students to think critically. I'm lucky in that I teach in a STEM field, so I rarely see that in my day to day life here, but I know that it's quite real.

have we brought up Jonathan Haidt and The Coddling of the American Mind? I can't remember. His thesis, if I have it right, is that 80s over-management and risk-aversion in parenting of children led to fragility and the sense of moral panic at the mention of challenging ideas in millennials and zoomers.

[Karl Henning]

helicopter parenthood....

[milk]

helicopter parenthood....

right. In Japan, children walk to school at 7 years old. But Japanese parents are still in the sandbox with them showing them how to build castles in the exact right way. Helicopter is everywhere

[greg]

The fact that you didn't go to school for music is pretty obvious from the second sentence of your post. If you think all a serious student of music needs can be found online, you clearly have no idea about what goes on in music schools and conservatories.

Because the study of music is not at all as narrow a matter as "what you need to know."

So...uhh...networking?

[milk]

So...uhh...networking?

I think if you're really dedicated and talented then you need mentors to challenge you; you need relationships that can deepen your practice and performance and that can encourage you to explore various paths to beyond.