05-31-2005, 04:41 PM
I am very cautious about valueing "merit" of academic education. In my opinion, all studies that classify as "academic" are worthwhile to support. True, there may be a limit on how many philosophers a society needs. But why should that mean it is less financed? An academic education doesn't educate for a job; it's the academic way of thinking that is most important, and that can be applied in many jobs, directly and indirectly.
If a nation doesn't consider a study to have enough merit, it shouldn't be taught at university, simple as that.
Also, merit can't be expressed in money. Though it is possible to simply take the wages of an academic and thus assign a value on the study, this doesn't take into account what someone might produce in terms of research. Someone can be a great philosopher, but earn little money. In terms of scientific progress the merit might be big.
What I like about this resolution is that it partly takes away the concern about future wages, and gives students the opportunity to follow a study they really want to do. It improves choice, and that's important for my nation.
If a nation doesn't consider a study to have enough merit, it shouldn't be taught at university, simple as that.
Also, merit can't be expressed in money. Though it is possible to simply take the wages of an academic and thus assign a value on the study, this doesn't take into account what someone might produce in terms of research. Someone can be a great philosopher, but earn little money. In terms of scientific progress the merit might be big.
What I like about this resolution is that it partly takes away the concern about future wages, and gives students the opportunity to follow a study they really want to do. It improves choice, and that's important for my nation.