According
to an Associated Press analysis
of data from 2011, 53.6 percent of college graduates under the age of 25 were
unemployed or, if they were lucky, merely underemployed, which means they were
in jobs for which their degrees weren’t necessary. Philosophy majors mull
questions no more existential than the proper billowiness of the foamed milk
atop a customer’s cappuccino. Anthropology majors contemplate the tribal
behavior of the youngsters who shop at the Zara where they peddle skinny jeans.
I
single out philosophy and anthropology because those are two fields — along
with zoology, art history and humanities — whose majors are least likely to
find jobs reflective of their education level, according to government
projections quoted by the Associated Press. But how many college students are
fully aware of that? How many reroute themselves into, say, teaching,
accounting, nursing or computer science, where degree-relevant jobs are easier
to find? Not nearly enough, judging from the angry, dispossessed troops of
Occupy Wall Street.
Enraged, I whipped off a response to the Times that attempted to correct some of the mistakes that Mr. Bruni made in the article. The article didn’t make it into the paper, but that’s the good news. Apparently many people had the same reaction I did and there was a flood of objections to Bruni’s piece. Here’s how I responded:
As
someone who has spent much of his life promoting the humanities as a Professor
of Philosophy at Molloy College on Long Island, I cannot help but be
dismayed by Frank Bruni’s uninformed assault upon my discipline (“The Imperiled
Promise of College”). Mr. Bruni cities a
report suggesting that philosophy and anthropology majors are “among the least
likely to find jobs reflective of their educational level” and then proceeds to make a snide insinuation
that the best that philosophy graduates can hope for in life is a job at their
local Starbucks.
What
Mr. Bruni fails to realize is that while there is no specific career path for philosophy
majors, the critical thinking and high-level communications skills provided by
a philosophy degree at a reputable institution of higher education serves
majors extremely well in whatever field they choose to enter—business, law,
medicine, teaching, and government, and many others as well. Perhaps that’s the reason why there has been
a dramatic rise in the number of philosophy majors at some of the best colleges
and universities all around the county.
At my own college, we’ve recently seen one of the largest increases in
majors in the history of our institution and the vast majority of our graduates
have gone on to rewarding careers where their philosophical training has proved
to be an immense asset. These students
obviously know something that Mr. Bruni doesn’t.
We
keep hearing from business leaders that recent college graduates are
ill-equipped to succeed in a highly competitive, global economy like the one in
which we are living. Perhaps the reason
for this is that instead of promoting disciplines in the humanities, like
philosophy, which train people in precisely the kinds of skills that we
desperately need to reestablish our position as a leader in the world, we
resort to simplistic stereotypes that serve only to discourage students from
considering such majors. That’s not
only a loss for college students, but it’s a serious loss for our country as
well.
That's a great letter, Mike. I couldn't have put it better myself. Thanks for writing it and posting it. Philosophers more generally need to do a better job of explaining exactly what sorts of skills they help students acquire. Perhaps it would help to spell out what critical thinking and high level communication skills are.
ReplyDelete1. Critical thinking requires mastery of logic, and generally the ability to detect the difference between good and bad reasoning. This is critical to any profession that requires reasoning (e.g., in the service of planning or decision-making). Logic is learned in philosophy departments.
2. Philosophy involves discussion of hypothetical cases, often regarding conceptually abstract and challenging subject matter. Learning to think about abstract hypothetical cases is crucial to those who need the job-related ability to "think outside the box".
3. Learning how to do philosophy is, in large part, learning how to write clear, concise, precise, well-organized, rigorous prose. Most professions require this ability.
4. Most philosophy programs require exposure to ethics, which is in very short supply, to everyone's detriment, in the professional world. Businesspeople are taught to think like cost minimizers and benefit maximizers, ethics be damned. This is not the way to build a better society for all. Capitalism is designed to function as an efficient economic system, but it is not self-regulating with respect to ethical problems (global warming, pollution, exploitation, fairness in hiring and firing, executive compensation, just to mention a few).
Bruni's basic mistake is to think that getting a job is largely a matter of what information you acquire in college. It isn't. Aside from information-heavy fields such as engineering and medicine, it's largely a matter of how well you can *think* about information, most of which is not acquired in college.
Actually, you made the case better than I did. I should have had you write the letter! Thanks for the support!
DeleteI think that you're deluding yourself. Disciplines like philosophy are dead, because no one in power wants an informed citenry that is capable of thinking critically. What they want are mindless robots that will keep voting in candidates from the two major political parties. Unfortunately, I think your discipline is doomed, because it represents too much of a treat to the power structure in this country.
ReplyDelete