Bee Gees Fan wrote:Well, I would agree there. I would say that science keeps people alive and the arts give us a reason to stay alive.
Okay, that's a generalisation and it doesn't apply to everyone, but hopefully you see what I mean. Science is what keeps us alive in the terms of medicine and technology but I think the majority of people need the arts - literature, music, film, TV, painting, poetry, etc - to have a good quality of life. Without any arts or entertainment, I think a lot of people would be significantly unhappier. Of course, science and technology give us a good quality of life too - and I love technology when it's used to enhance entertainment! Thanks to technology we films!
Yep, wouldn't disagree at all. i come from an artsy background, and i do everything with some form of sound and vision playing constantly in the background. I'd hate to live in a world devoid of creativity. Thankfully you don't really need educational institutions to teach/nurture creativity (that's different to thinking they're unnecessary within education - schools should continue to encourage it).
Okay, I think I understand you a little better now. You're saying that in order to be successful in the arts or in order to be successfully creative, a degree is not essential. People can excel creatively without degrees. But in order to excel in maths/science, a degree usually is essential.
Yes, that's pretty much the gist
I would probably agree with that, although I don't think it applies to every case. There are cases where a degree in the arts *will* be essential to someone's career choice. Maybe not as much as in science or engineering but sometimes it will be necessary.
Oh i agree that we've created a society where a degree in a subject is perceived as necessary by many employers in any field, but in reality I can't think of one place where an arts degree should be essential. There were always other qualifications that could be earned - including technical ones you could acquire while working in various industries. Eg, if you want to be a technical person like a cameraman, lighting director, animator, etc, i don't see the need for an art degree to get into that. It's the sort of thing you tend to do best by being taught on the job and learning from experienced people in the discipline. I don't see the benefit of doing a degree in lighting direction.
There is more to studying a degree than to learn the skills for a specific job, though. A general art degree is maybe a good background for artistic things, history can be good for learning to research, critivcally evaluate and contextualise information, etc. English is obviously useful for a multitude of reasons. I'm not sure they're essential, in the same way math and science are, but certainly useful.
Still, I think ultimately it should be (and is) the choice of the individual. I think people should be encouraged to pursue their interests in higher education, whatever the subject is. I think when people are allowed to pursue their interests, they are happier people and are more likely to be successful in their studying if it's something they're interested in.
Of course it is. I'm certainly not talking about changing that.
A friend from the creative writing side of the degree originally went to study economics (or something like that) in London because his parents wanted him to. He hated it and also became ill, I believe. So in the end, he dropped out and signed up for English and Creative Writing at my university. Following his passion (and the subject that he was actually better at) and, in a romantic sense, his heart.
Good for him. Not sure of the relevance, but quite right for him to do what he wants not what others want him to do.
Would you say that maths, science and engineering are more 'difficult' than the other subjects, though? I'm not sure I would say that. How difficult a subject is depends on what the individual's skills and aptitudes are for. For an artistically or creatively inclined individual, maths and science will be more difficult, but for for someone who is very talented at maths and science, it will be the creative arts that are more difficult. I remember quite a few students at secondary school who did great in Maths and Science but got D grades in English, for example. Some of them really struggled with it. They were bright kids, they just found English (particularly the more creative side, I suspect) very difficult. And their spelling wasn't always the best, I suspect because they didn't usually enjoy reading recreationally.
So I don't think science and maths are more inherently difficult than other subjects, I think a subject's difficult is subjective. It depends on what the individual is good at.
I used 'difficult' in the sense of how people label them in academia and business circles. This is a bit hazy, and based on no certain fact, but I guess they're called difficult because it requires quite a specific type of disciplined approach to learning a hell of a lot of necessary information and then being able to regurgitate it and apply it to 'real world' situations. Sounds trite, flippant, whatever, but they're highly academic subjects, and hence are difficult subjects academically.
If they weren't such difficult subjects we wouldn't have the shorfall in people taking these courses into higher education. Maybe people are more creatively inclined (or more comfortable dealing with less academic subjects) so it's more natural to be drawn into more arts/humanities subjects. I don't know.
To be fair, some institutions also class certain History, Literature and Fine Art courses as 'difficult'. I suspect because they're 'classical' subjects of ancient institutions.
I think with some people in academia, though, that there is a kind of intellectual snobbery towards creative subjects like the arts. And that's something I dislike. I think every subject is 'valid' whether it be a science degree, music degree, or a sports degree. I remember when I was doing A-Level Drama, one of my fellow Drama classmates was told that she by studying Drama, she wasn't studying a 'real' subject. What rubbish! We did a lot of theoretical and written work in Drama, it certainly wasn't all fun and games. We learned a lot about certain acting and theatre styles. I don't think people should be made to feel less intellectual or less academic because they are studying certain subjects. I think they all have academic value.
i agree. I think there is intellectual snobbery, and yes all subjects have academic value. As i say, i simply think the sciences and mathematics, and in turn medicine and engineering, need incentivising over others to try and quash the shortfall in numbers. It's important to have strength in these areas for the wellbeing of the nation. It's not at all about preventing people from partaking in other subjects.