RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceWe might as well just shut down Princeton University.
That's right everyone: Pack up all your stuff, schlep over to the Dinky Station and return to your states and countries of origin. We've had a good run over ...
(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
This is a place of higher education, not a trade school or money making mill. That less students take money into account when choosing a major should be exciting, or at the very least reacted to in a manner other than "this school is worth nothing now, it should cease to exist." When universities were created, they were designed to stimulate a life of the mind. For the YOUTH of America to have all the curiousity, discovery, excitement, and stimulation of that youth ripped away by the concerns of monetary success (this is what you argue should happen) would be a sad waste of some of the brightest minds of our generation. I don't want to knock your article because you are putting yourself out there and sharing your ideas and that's great, however I just think it's unfortunate for a freshman to already by sharing this mindset.
On a more practical note, many I-Bankers and consultants making huge figures were philosophy majors, english majors, art history majors, east asian studies majors. Within those extremely faulty "averages" are people who CHOSE less profitable careers, not necessarily those who were forced into them by virtue of their major.
Even if you take the dumb (or facetious) position that salaries are what count in our graduates, an obsession over starting salaries is not the way to measure the career prospects of different majors.
For example, philosophy majors, often lumped with comparative literature and art history as un-focused on careers, make the same 90th percentile salary as political science and electrical engineering majors at mid-career, according to the WSJ. Civil engineering may pay a little more right out of school, but at mid-career, philosophy, math, and physics majors are making more.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/document...
While your heart is in the right place, Sam, your reasoning is not. The advantage of coming to an elite school like Princeton is precisely that your choice of major doesn't compromise your career options. So long as you maintain a good GPA (and, presumably, have some reasonably significant course-work in your intended career-field), your prospects for career success in almost any job will be high. To be sure, there are certainly industries (particularly quantitative finance and high-tech work) where your major will most certainly influence your ability to perform well, but those jobs are few and far between (and the students who would go into them will already have gravitated toward the requisite major).
As evidence, simply look at where students from non-science majors end up. Many, many humanities majors move into finance or consulting -- regardless of their major.
Moreover, consider that one of Princeton's most successful and admirable graduates of the past 50 years -- billionaire activist investor Carl Icahn -- was a philosophy major. His thesis, needless to say, had nothing to do with finance -- but he succeeded brilliantly nevertheless.
(We might also mention Leon Black, billionaire private equity maven from Dartmouth, who studied philosophy and history.)
This article puts far greater weight on the practicality of the sciences and their appropriateness as a major choice presumably because "scientists," "engineers," (along with "economists" and "speakers of Arabic, Farsi, and Pashtun" are working more "in the nation's service." Contributing to the humanities of this country is very ingrained in service to our nation. Art and architectural restoration, historical education and literary tradition are all very important facets that make America the fascinating place it is. Without those people passionate enough to pursue those "esoteric" majors, America would be a very cold, hollow place indeed.
(Not to mention, many people are more creatively minded in this sense and their talents are best utilized in such fields.)
For a minute I thought this was satire. Is it?
"...the primary purpose of the college experience is to serve society, find a practical career, and establish financial security."
This is either a stunningly pitch-perfect satire of the careerist attitude that thoroughly misunderstands the purpose of a liberal-arts education, or a stunningly ill-informed airing of it. Luckily the author is a first-year student, and perhaps there is therefore still hope he won't leave Princeton with his philistinism intact.
What's the point of working toward financial stability if you don't enjoy yourself?
This is a stupid article based off of an incorrect premise. After all, if all students picked majors based off of the financial and career prospects, we simply wouldn't have liberal arts degrees. and there would be no Princeton. and I would go to MIT. and not know who Plato or Twain or Singer or Arendt are. and I would be stupid. much like you.
Seriously? I completely agree with whoever said freshmen should not be allowed to write op-ed so early in the year. And I find it insulting to assume that Princeton students who choose "esoteric" majors are not fully aware of the repercussions of their decisions - in fact, I feel like most students who take "risks" by choosing to major in Russian Lit or Art History are actually converts from Econ and Finance. We know what we're doing, we've weighed the pros and cons.
Stupid, stupid, stupid - I have to reassure myself that not everyone at Princeton thinks like Sam Norton (though there are quite a few who do).
Sam Norton - I would avoid all "esoteric" humanities majors.
It's people like this Sam Norton who do not belong at Princeton, and more importantly do not DESERVE to take advantage of the many resources and intellectual freedom afforded to us here. I can't believe that anyone with a modicum of intelligence could think up such a PROFOUNDLY STUPID and insulting premise-- since when is anything that isn't what he deems to be relevant to current events, unworthy of study? What about oh, I don't know, the propagation of CULTURE? What would a country be without its authors, artists, and oddball specialists? Frankly, I feel that the article was a huge slap in the face to the professors on campus; those who have devoted their lives to the education of others certainly would not fall under Sam Norton's definition of what is a worthy cause, and certainly not one that is financially well- recompensed. To state that people who major in "esoteric" subjects are in any way less serving of the public, is not only incredibly insulting, but ignorant-- it's narrow-minded to denigrate the studying of history, philosophy, art, religion, etc., things that have shaped the course of history AND current affairs AND the way YOU live your life. That the Prince allowed such filth to be published in its pages is appalling and terrifying-- what other idiots like this guy exist here? Probably many, but the world would be a better place if they weren't in it.
And for your information, it's not just "Princeton in the nation's service", what about "Princeton in the service of ALL nations"? Must we be so America-centric that all we do must serve some ultracapitalistic, money-grabbing, culture-scorning end? Serving the world should involve truly understanding other cultures and peoples (which would be impossible without literature, art, anthropology, etc). Duh.