Filling Educational Holes
by Tom • Mar 31st, 2008 at 12:08 pm •
We were continuing our discussion about higher education in email and Prescott, perceiving the possibility of an intellectual challenge, asked me if I could be specific about the kinds of knowledge that is needed, but is not possessed, by current college graduates.
Here’s my list and explanations why they’re necessary:
Our cultural icons: Almost all of the literature of the English-speaking world references a set of works written prior to the 18th Century. A familiarity with these works facilitates understanding of any non-technical work in print.
Shakespeare–knowledge of the text of the best two dozen plays, at least. The plot should be understood and one should be able to determine which play a random quote is derived from. He invented a thousand words of the English language, including bedroom. His plays demonstrate why. Extra credit for “getting” the dirty parts.
The Bible–both the King James for the language and a more modern translation for the meaning. This should be done with a reference in one hand so that the historical context for the writing is clear. One should be able to trace the differing authors of the Torah through its books.
Dante’s Divine Comedy in an English translation that keeps the original poetic structure.
The Roman and Greek writers–pick a half dozen of each (that includes Virgil and Plato) and read everything extant in English.
Necessary skills–these are to give you both a foundation and flexibility to adapt to new input:
Poetry–In order to understand better how to communicate, the underlying structure of language should be studied. If you can write a sonnet that someone is willing to read, you can write a business report that will get you the promotion you desire.
Languages–you should be able to read comfortably (without a dictionary) two languages besides your birth language. They can be in the same language family, although it does more for you if they’re not. This enables you to switch back and forth from different conceptual worlds and gives you words to describe those things that can’t be described with English.
Mechanics–you should understand the workings of the items that you use every day–how to rewire a lamp, how your car works (and what each system does), why your plumbing and electrical systems are set up the way that they are. This way, if you’re caught in an emergency, you can survive without help. Firearms usage falls under this category–one small-arm and one long-arm should be studied until they can be cleaned and used safely and you can hit a torso-sized target at range nine out of ten times. You should be able to scratch-build a computer that works out of purchased parts.
Mathematics–you should understand on an instinctive level discrete math, algebra, geometry (including trig), enough calculus to know when it’d be useful, and statistics until you can perform them in your sleep. All science is based upon math. You should also be able to run a balance-sheet for a household or a business.
General science–you should be able to tell the difference between a hypothesis, a conjecture, and a model and where each is useful.
Hard sciences–you should understand the standard model in physics, chemistry, biology, and astronomy well enough to determine if a new discovery disputes or corroborates it.
Soft sciences–you should understand two or three historically used theories of sociology, economics, political science, law, and game and network theory well-enough to be able to explain them to a layman.
Politics–A complete understanding of the foundation of the United States is needed, including a working knowledge of the Federalist Papers. The biographies and letters of three of the Founding Fathers should be read well enough to reference (take your pick.) Two political systems that have failed should be analyzed until the reasons for their failure becomes second nature. This is to make you a good citizen.
Military history–the development of arms and armaments from the Bronze Age to the present should be studied. The dates of battles are less important than the “feel” for what happened and why. Special attention should be paid to lost battles that shouldn’t have been and to small technical improvements, like the stirrup, that made large-scale changes. As a practical exam after study, you should lead a squad into battle, either virtual or real. This skill could keep you alive in a situation where you are under fire, either here or abroad.
Business–the operation of a small business should be observed in detail until the reasons for its success or failure become obvious. The history of capital acquistion and investment should be studied in the cases of both spectacular wins and losses.
Human anatomy–your body should be studied well enough to make regular diagnoses that are correct. The anatomy of the opposite gender (or more of the same if you’re gay) should be studied until it’s understood and you’re capable of delivering great sexual pleasure to it. You should be able to aid a mother giving birth or provide first-aid in a crisis situation.
Farming/Hunting–Plant and care for a garden for one year. Kill an animal with a gun or a knife, skin it, prepare it for cooking, cook and eat it, and tan the leather.
Engineering–Learn enough to be able to analyze one problem each in mechanical, electrical and civil engineering and create solutions. The reason for this one should be obvious–innovative problem-solving is the thing that Americans do best.
Music and art–understand the mathematical rules by which music and art operate. Be familiar enough with the history of each to be able to tell when a piece of Western art or music was created and by which school.
I think that that should do for now. If anyone on the list has any essentials that I’ve missed, please add them.
Tom
Comment by Hanno on 31 March 2008 at 12:22 pm:
My God Tom that’s profound! You’re arguing for…A liberal education! Holy cow! No one has ever suggested this before! Especially not the thousands of professors and academics who have written extensive books or devoted chapters in other books to it. You want critical thinking, cultural base knowledge, and practical skills…how profoundly unprofound man. I mean I agree with you generally, but this isn’t really anything new or verboten.
Comment by tet on 31 March 2008 at 12:37 pm:
Hell, I know that, Hanno. I printed this on the urging of Billy Joe and Brian. The gist of my argument is that modern college students are not receiving a liberal education.
Did you?
Some of the items, particularly the warfare, first-aid, farming/hunting, and mechanical skills have never been taught in college. I believe that the proper place for them is in the high-school level of curriculum.
I’m not seeking profundity by this post, just a better world resulting from the application of the liberal education.
Tom
Comment by Chris J on 31 March 2008 at 2:17 pm:
At least 1/2 of that list is just absurd. Killing an animal? Really? Do we live in the backwoods of Minnesota or something? Is this 1845?
Learning everything would take about 15 years of education. College is for specialization, not for learning everything about everything. Some of this list I do agree with, and I also agree that it should be done on the high school level.
Comment by Anonymous on 31 March 2008 at 2:35 pm:
Specialization is for insects.
You left off cooking,cleaning, automobile repair, how to run a cash drawer and keep both inventory/ books of records for a business. Geography and simple navigation (such as understanding how to read, say, a transit map). An understanding of how financial systems work at both the macro and personal level. Some level of preventive medicine and basic pharmacology to go with the first aid course. Public speaking and leading meetings, with working knowledge of Robert’s rules and other means of keeping order and directing the discussion. Basic principles of design and aesthetics.
Comment by Anonymous on 31 March 2008 at 2:39 pm:
I tried to apply for financial aid to go to the University of Tet but my forms came back “Denied– Root Hog or Die.”
So I’m back at work.
Comment by Allan Niemerg on 31 March 2008 at 2:55 pm:
Things on Tom’s list I have no use for:
1.)Shakespeare
2.)Large chunks of the bible
3.)Poetry
4.)Languages (sometimes I wish I did know another language, but as of now, I have neither the desire nor the opportunity to pursue this)
5.)Military history (although I enjoy History channel military history)
6.)Farming/Hunting (although I’ve done all of the things listed, save for the tanning), and
7.) Music and art - I like music and art, but don’t want to know the “mathematical rules” or the “schools”
This post illustrates the fundamental problem with the complaints that “our children are not learning enough.” There is no consensus on what a liberal education is, nor on what it should be. And to my mind, that is a great thing.
An important aspect of education is learning for oneself what constitutes a good education. Education is not the passive process of filling young minds with the appropriate nuggets of education, but instead is an active process of discovery–a process that is unavoidably heterogeneous.
Therefore, this whole conversation is overblown. Young people today are fine, and are more prepared then ever for the skills required in the workplace. But the skills they are learning are often the skills that will be used in tomorrow’s workforce, not today’s. And to the extent that there are certain “timeless” skills such as mathematics, I’m unconvinced that today’s students are any worse at them.
To me, the evidence to show otherwise always seems to be limited to specific domains–often in domains that are changing in relevancy. For example, I’m sure students today are much worse at spelling than they were decades or even a decade ago. But when you have spell check, the need for a heavy emphasis on memorizing the spelling of words isn’t as great, and it is rational to redirect efforts elsewhere. Similarly, in the age of the computer and TI-83, it is a waste to teach students how to multiply using logarithmic tables. So I think that some of this concern really only reflects the evolution of the relevancy of certain skill-sets.
Don’t worry, the kids are (mostly) alright.
Allan
Comment by kittent on 31 March 2008 at 2:55 pm:
chris j- Read time enough for love by Robert Heinlein. Even if you skip the sex you can learn an awful lot from the Admiral.
You might not have to wring a chicken’s neck to keep from starving, but if you were starving you might wish you knew how (and if your dog or cat needs to be put down, do you really want to leave that job for a stranger.
Grad school is for specialization. Undergrads just need to be taught how to adapt…and the system as it stands sucks at teaching this.
Let’s say you start in junior high or high school to learn the variety of things you need to have a truly liberal education. With four years of undergrad as well that will give you 8-10 years…you can take more time if you are a slow learner.
Part of the problem is with the educational system and part of it is with the stupid idea that it is a kindness to let adolescence last until a person is in his mid twenties. :P
Comment by kittent on 31 March 2008 at 3:01 pm:
allan:
1.)Shakespeare
2.)Large chunks of the bible
3.)Poetry
4.)Languages (sometimes I wish I did know another language, but as of now, I have neither the desire nor the opportunity to pursue this)
5.)Military history (although I enjoy History channel military history)
6.)Farming/Hunting (although I’ve done all of the things listed, save for the tanning), and
7.) Music and art - I like music and art, but don’t want to know the “mathematical rules” or the “schools”
I cringed a little more at each item listed and your disdain for life of the mind. What do YOU consider to be necessary for an education????????
Comment by Brian on 31 March 2008 at 3:25 pm:
There are things I’d quibble with on this list (hunting an animal? no thanks), and I think you have to put a stronger emphasis on some of these things than others, but on the whole, I totally embrace Tom’s sentiment on this. Education is not just about preparing a person for his or her job; it’s about preparing them to live in society and be able to interact healthily and happily within that society. The broader each individual’s base of knowledge is, the better everybody gets along, the better our democracy functions, and the easier our problems are to solve.
Comment by Hanno on 31 March 2008 at 3:39 pm:
A teacher in junior high school once told us something along these lines:
Grades K-12 teach you how to follow rules.
College teaches you how to think critically
Grad School teaches you to specialize
College really should be about preparing you to think hard and roll with the punches hell all education should. Specialization in the 21st century is sort of a bad thing when the average person in OUR PARENT’S generation changes careers about five times in their life. Why specialize when you will just get outdated? It’s better to be highly adaptable than specialized.
Comment by Allan Niemerg on 31 March 2008 at 3:43 pm:
I cringed a little more at each item listed and your disdain for life of the mind. What do YOU consider to be necessary for an education????????
Well, my point was that I don’t think there is, or should be, a set of things that constitutes a basic “liberal” education. I agree that an active “life of the mind” is important, I just don’t agree that there is some minimum set that qualifies one as “educated.”
But I do have a rather lengthy list of intellectual pursuits. Indeed, perhaps sadly, I really don’t have very many non-intellectual pursuits.
My current topics of interest include:
1.) nanotechnology, specifically nanoelectronics
2.) game theory
3.) biology, specifically cellular biology, the science of proteins, DNA and cellular processes
4.) rapid protyping(RepRap, Fab@Home, etc.)
5.) atomic energy, specifically fission energy (I’m a fusion skeptic)
6.) solar power(specifically nano-solar tech and cheaper-than-coal tech)
7.) intellectual property and law more generally (i.e. my graduate studies)
8.) and, of course, politics.
Shakespeare and poetry they are not, but they are what I want for my education. I make no apologizes to those who would find such a list lacking.
Allan
Comment by Brian on 31 March 2008 at 3:50 pm:
Oh, one thing I’d add to this list is a basic awareness of life outside our borders and of international conflicts outside our national interest. Nothing too in depth necessarily, but a basic understanding of what’s going on in Asia, Africa, the EU, the Americas, etc.
Comment by tet on 31 March 2008 at 3:51 pm:
Chris J–I would never ask anyone to do anything I had not done myself. I had learned everything on the list except for the soft sciences, the third language, and the experience leading a squad in combat by the time I was 22. The last thing I learned was Spanish, which I studied at the age of 52.
You do not yet know the things of which you are capable. Fifteen years, my ass.
Allan, you comment on our culture, yet, without the cultural references I mentioned, I believe that it impossible to understand it. You should not be capable of describing how our culture will develop into the 21st Century and the skills people will need for it without a depth of background in what it is in the first place.
I cringed right along with kitten. You do not understand what you’re missing. As a professional educator, it was my job to teach students the things that they didn’t know they needed, in spite of their protestations.
Tom
Comment by Billy Joe Mills on 31 March 2008 at 4:46 pm:
Tom,
This isn’t an accusation, rather a curiosity…are you proficient in all of the things you urge of us in this list?
Comment by tet on 31 March 2008 at 5:28 pm:
Am I proficient?
I am in the cultural icons, although I must confess that I should re-read the Roman authors once again. I find new things every time I reread Shakespeare. I tried to learn enough Biblical Hebrew to read the Tanakh in the original, but I failed. I am less knowledgable about the New Testament than the old.
Poetry–understand the mathematics of the forms, but cannot do the art–it’s like painting or composing music. As far as I know, I can’t do those, either.
I can read Spanish well, French less. I cannot effectively speak either. I can pick my way through Portuguese, Italian, and Latin with a dictionary for the hard stuff.
I confess to not understanding how modern cars work. I can still operate a gun safely, although my glaucoma precludes me from hitting targets consistently. I can operate a welder, metal lathe, and milling machine and produce parts to a three-mil tolerance.
Math, fine, although stats are a bit rusty; general science, fine; hard sciences, far beyond minimum I listed.
Soft sciences–my weakest point. I’ve absorbed the fundamentals of economics, sociology, political science and so forth, but they don’t make a lot of sense. I guess they’re not really sciences, per se, but opinions of scholars–proving hypotheses are difficult.
I understand the foundations of law under the American and British court systems and how they differ from, say, the Code Napoleon but the details and nuances escape me. Network and game theory, I’m fine.
Military history’s my forte and hobby. As I’ve mentioned before, I competed on a national level in the historical simulation game, Advanced Squad Leader. I’m a fanatic on the subject, with a specialization in The Great Patriotic War (WW2 on the Eastern Front). I did not go to Vietnam, but I have successfully led real human soldiers in simulated battlefields and won with minimal casualties.
Politics, hell yes, but I have come to different conclusions than many, although the libertarians mostly agree with me. I have biases.
Human anatomy, yes.
I regularly butchered cows, rabbits, hogs, and chickens as a teenager. I’m not any good at cooking them, but I know which parts are edible and how to get them clean. I spent thirteen years gardening, both flower and food.
Those two skills above, Chris, are listed for philosophical reasons, as well as their utility. Mankind is dependent on food, and has been for its entire existence. If food is only bought at the grocery store, there is no understanding of its orgin. In order to eat meat, something must die. Not watching it do that, at least once, is a coward’s way out.
Music and art, not a strong point, but I think I can pass the minimum that I mentioned.
I’m not some kind of supergenius, Billy Joe. My Benet IQ tested at 142 when I was a kid, and my brain damage dropped it to its current 126. (I also lost my “scratch-pad” memory due to the heart attack). My biggest asset in life has been the ability to read 700 words per minute.
I was handicapped in my per-college life by lack of reading material on the subjects. I was limited to the contents of a library in a blue-collar town of 3000. (Fortunately, when I arrived at the University of Illinois, the first thing I got was a stacks pass). My biggest detriment in life was the five years that I was drunk. I may have learned some things during this time, but I don’t remember them.
Brian’s right, btw–I forgot international relations.
One last note for Allan and Chris–these are supposed to be studied in addition to your specialization, not instead of it.
Tom
Comment by thetodd on 31 March 2008 at 7:16 pm:
Perhaps before any of these subjects are taught, it would be wise to cultivate a desire for knowledge, a recognition of its usefulness, the ability to make connections between seemingly unrelated knowledge, and the ability to apply knowledge to real-world problems.
See, when I was growing up, I was completely unable to see any utility in any classes outside of my core interests (math, science, and computers). I learned my Shakespeare well enough to pass my tests, but I forgot it all a few days later. It was not until a couple of years in to college that my interests started broadening.
Nowadays, my interests are more diverse, but, had I gone through Tet’s curriculum in high school, I would’ve strongly disliked it and not retained most of what I learned.
If I could make just a couple of small changes to the typical modern public school curriculum, I’d probably add a personal finance course and revamp the health and nutrition courses.
I’m not sure how to solve the psychological problems associated with these subjects, though. Kids feel immortal and usually can’t do too much short-term damage to themselves. The health problems don’t show up until years later. They have a similar problem with their finances - with no family to support and 40-50+ years to retirement, there’s not a strong short-term incentive to make good decisions.
Comment by segen on 31 March 2008 at 7:20 pm:
Allan–I think you would like the Montessori schooling idea that gives children the opportunity to learn about math, science, reading, writing, etc. at their own pace. A child would stay at a “reading station” for a week if he/she wanted to. Those who were more curious in math at the time would stay at the “math section” for a couple days. Wikipedia “Montessori Method”.
Comment by segen on 31 March 2008 at 7:23 pm:
How much school are we supposed to go through to “excel”? Grad school is the new undergraduate degree…if you’re getting a law degree…mba…there goes another few years of your life…
Here’s a thought: when am I going to have kids? When I’m 35? If I’m starting that late…I probably won’t have more than one.
What are the externalities of increased education? Population decrease?
Comment by illinikc33 on 31 March 2008 at 7:43 pm:
Todd, I agree completely with your comment…well said.
Comment by tet on 31 March 2008 at 9:26 pm:
Todd, I learned machine shop, calculus, drafting, engineering and French from High School and College. Even when I went to school, the educational system was not good enough to give me the others in the time they had. Nowadays, it’s an order of magnitude worse.
The rest of it, I taught myself with books from the library combined with a burning desire to learn or from watching my family members (in the case of practical skills). I, like you, Todd, was bored to death in high school, and for the non-technical parts of college. By the time I arrived, though, I was able to proficiency all of my LAS core courses.
The soft sciences, I taught myself during the ten years I worked as a blue-collar worker, bringing books and reading them during breaks and over lunch.
I later learned Spanish at Parkland, but we’re talking thirty years later.
Todd, we’ll talk about all of this at kittencon–you, too, Segen and Billy. You sure you don’t want to come over, Prescott? Todd, you’re absolutely right about the desire for learning being the key.
Segen, it’s very likely you’ll not be able to have a career and take reasonable care of your children unless you’re living in an extended family. Therefore, the sooner you can have them, the younger you’ll be when they leave home at eighteen and you can continue with your education. You’ll also have a much easier time finding a father for them at 25 than at 35.
As far as “How long to excel?”, keep in mind, Segen, that I learned most of this material before I was 22. You’ve had more than enough time to learn what you need.
BTW, the 3:35 anon had some excellent additions.
Tom
Comment by Segen on 31 March 2008 at 10:20 pm:
Tet–
Sounds like you were giving me the cold shoulder: “I learned most of this material before I was 22. You’ve had more than enough time to learn what you need.”
Yes I have had time…and I don’t feel that I am lacking in my education at all…so no problem, Tet! I have a great handle on your educational laundry list, sans killing of animals.
My point, that I think you mistook, is that the current trends in education is: more, more, more. Your route by having the studies completed by the age of 22 doesn’t seem to mesh with the actuality of the education system today. We’re all getting advanced degrees now…to prove we’re worth of…what? JD, MBA, PhD…blahblahblah.
Secondly, my point was that the longer society requires students to be in higher-education, the longer students wait to have children. Both women AND men must deal with this situation. Women are certainly becoming older mothers, but the same goes with men being older fathers.
Women shouldn’t have to put their education on hold to have children, or more specifically, to RAISE children. I believe the responsibility of child-rearing lies with both parents–not just one. So if mothers and fathers want to have children at a reasonable and safer age (for the child’s sake of not suffering from Down-Syndrome)…they should hang their education up on the shelf? I say…this is insane. Why can’t society offer more concentrated education (year round perhaps) so students AREN’T thirty when they get their first jobs and then thirty-five when they start thinking of having children?
An example: Germany is currently looking into reducing high-school by one year to encourage students (particularly women) to enter and finish college sooner. Then students can begin their careers earlier–and have children earlier. This is an effort to boost their lagging birth rates.
Comment by JayBandit on 31 March 2008 at 10:25 pm:
Todd & Kevin,
Just learning what you want to learn teaches you to be a spoiled little bitch, which is exactly what is happening with today’s kids.
Tom,
I agree completely with your sentiment here. I had to show one of my good friends (mind you, this same guy served our country in Iraq for a tour of duty) how to change a flat tire. I don’t blame him, he grew up in a single-mother household and is one of your typical slightly-introverted engineers.
The one thing I’m most proud about myself is not my job, money, education, or the like. I’m most proud that my family taught me the vast majority of the things I didn’t learn in school. My mother is the accountant of the family, and always kept me informed of big money issues that affected our family. My father & grandfather employed me in various jobs from the time I was a teenager in order to show me how to take care of myself and to teach me the value of the dollar.
Today, I’m constantly given kudos by my peers & elders for knowing simple things like how to change out a toilet, and that just surprises the hell out of me every time.
I have to say I’ve never fired any type of gun other than a pellet-gun, and I’ve only killed a few rodents in my day. Although the ultra-liberals on the blog might see that as barbaric and cruel, I always look at it from the perspective of what I’d need to know if there was some type of end-of-world scenario, whether be it me lost on some island, or the vast majority of the population died and I was the last man in New York (I am Legend-esque, minus the vampires). Although it may seem useless with today’s amenities…you just never know what could happen to you.
Countless people die in the wilderness every year because they weren’t knowledgeable to look up at the fucking sky and figure out which way North was…
Or, collectively, Americans pay millions each year to have service technicians come into their homes and fix such “daunting” tasks as fixing a leaky faucet or re-wiring a blown electrical outlet.
For anyone that knows me even slightly, you’d be well aware by now that I’m quite obsessive about music, and although I don’t think it is necessary for survival, it is important for the mind nonetheless. The same can be said for great literature & other art. The greatest travesty of modern education is that the most struggling school districts cut out the music & art programs first and foremost, creating more and more dull people who would rather watch & pay money to vote between singers on American Idol than pick up a guitar or set of drums and learn how to play anything themselves.
Lastly, I consider myself a non-religious, but moral, person (Raised catholic, never been to church on Easter/Christmas, or most other normal days); however, I’d be the first to tell you the importance of the Bible. Most of modern history is based on the bible in one shape, form, or another. Entire kingdoms rose and fell because of the beliefs in that single book. No other tangible artifact in human history can make such a boast save for the Bible.
Comment by illinikc33 on 31 March 2008 at 11:06 pm:
Todd & Kevin,
Just learning what you want to learn teaches you to be a spoiled little bitch, which is exactly what is happening with today’s kids.
I’m not sure this makes any sense, or that there is any remote causal connection between “learning what you want to learn” and somehow becoming a “spoiled little bitch” (I thought that happened when you got a Popsicle whenever you whined about it at age 4). If that was the case, I assume Jay that all college grads are spoiled little bitches because they learned what they wanted to learn while in school?
Jay, are you a spoiled little bitch because you learned what you wanted to learn while @ UIUC?
Comment by segen on 1 April 2008 at 12:06 am:
Jay–
I think you hit it on the nail:
All the stuff we didn’t learn in school we should learn from…. parents, friends, peers, and community members.
Maybe instead of institutionalizing these skills at schools, we should encourage students to join extra-curricular activities like the girl/boy scouts, dance and music lessons, sports, electrical clubs, etc….
That’s my take.
Comment by tet on 1 April 2008 at 10:46 am:
Segen, go back and read my comments, these in particular:
Todd, I learned machine shop, calculus, drafting, engineering and French from High School and College. Even when I went to school, the educational system was not good enough to give me the others in the time they had. Nowadays, it’s an order of magnitude worse.
The rest of it, I taught myself with books from the library combined with a burning desire to learn or from watching my family members (in the case of practical skills). I, like you, Todd, was bored to death in high school, and for the non-technical parts of college. By the time I arrived, though, I was able to proficiency all of my LAS core courses.
The soft sciences, I taught myself during the ten years I worked as a blue-collar worker, bringing books and reading them during breaks and over lunch.
I learned very few of these skills in the educational system, even though it was much better then.
The gist of my statements is that we need a liberal education (and we need it young), colleges and high schools are not providing it (and haven’t in the last fifty years), so in order to have the info, young adults need to learn the material on their own or with the help of their parents.
Undergrad colleges are useless in a real sense except for a few snippets for students’ specialties and the paper that HR currently wants. (HR personnel I’ve talked to in the last year desperately want to stop and go back to aptitude tests–that bubble may burst.)
Even though they’re useless in creating better people, they’re taking up an unnecessary part of human life and costing tens of thousands of dollars for what is, for want of a better term, fraud.
This will not continue. Either industry will change, since they won’t want to pay what students will need to pay their loans, low-cost alternatives like a University of Phoenix on steroids will develop, or the federal government will begin regulating the university system in order to enable “all Americans to get a college education.”
I think my point has been proven.
Tom
Comment by Billy Joe Mills on 1 April 2008 at 11:22 am:
I nominate Chess as an addition to the list.
Comment by tet on 1 April 2008 at 12:49 pm:
Chess is a stylized wargame, as is Go. As such, it is a worthy study. It’s cultural roots are deep and it is enjoyed across the cultures of a billion people. I think a well-rounded person ought to be able to translate Through the Looking Glass into the chess game it represents.
Tom
Comment by Katie on 1 April 2008 at 8:07 pm:
This list is great, and if I was willing to devote a lot of time and energy to it, I’d be able to complete what I haven’t already. The problem with me, and probably most other people my age (early 20s), is that we are not willing to devote that time or energy; it is completely unrealistic. We’re distracted by media and technology, and the nearly unlimited communication they provide. What’s worse, we were taught, from a very young age, to take tests, pass tests, and forget what we learned. This has made much of my generation incapable of retaining large amounts of information. I don’t know if that makes us “spoiled bitches” or victims of a failed system.
I think that intelligence is another factor that you’re not completely taking into account. Based on your Urbanagora bio and your comments here, you’re a really smart guy. To have accomplished all that you did by age 22 requires incredible intelligence and a desire to learn, but not all people have that intelligence or desire. While I admire your drive, I think you can expect it only from a very small portion of today’s youth.