[hn_throwaway_99]

These days, if you want to just "learn for learning's sake", or for self improvement, there are tons of free and cheap ways to get a good education.

The only reason people are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars for college is that it is a credentialed degree that people think will open up career doors. We shouldn't beat around the bush on this fact.

[auctoritas]

Not only that, truly advancing into the depths of a subject, becoming a scholar and serious intellectual in the process, is a path reserved for but a few. The moment you force the masses into higher education as the default path that earlier justification of University as the forge of scholars becomes anachronistic and new justifications must be created.

[nhtsamera]

You can't access expensive hardware on YouTube.

If you want to learn about chemistry or biology for learning's sake, good luck. Most autodidacts won't have space in their apartment for a -80C freezer or flammables cabinet, and their landlords might not approve the installation of a proper fume hood.

We have things very easy in software. The cost of iteration is low, you can fit a respectable laboratory in the space underneath your desk, and you're unlikely to accidentally poison or maim somebody if you screw up an unwise experiment. Not many fields have that luxury.

[korroziya]

>These days, if you want to just "learn for learning's sake", or for self improvement, there are tons of free and cheap ways to get a good education

I agree, but you won't have a sheet of paper proving it. It's like that infamous scene from Good Will Hunting. Question is whether you want an easy way to PROVE you're educated. Which is what a license, certificate or diploma grants you.

[fooqux]

The person you replied to already covers that in the following sentences.

Why else would you need to prove your education except for work?

[haswell]

In a hypothetical post-work era where people no longer build their reputation via career, it’s not hard to imagine group dynamics emerging such that education level is no longer a means to an end, but an end unto itself.

Essentially a new way to establish hierarchies.

[fooqux]

Sure... if we ever get there, I could potentially see that.

But we're nowhere close to that. Also, if it's being used to establish hierarchies, I could still see that proof being important.

[haswell]

Maybe I misread your comment. All of this thread is speculative, including the speculation that degrees will become less and less relevant.

Getting “there” doesn’t happen overnight, but the point is that we are already heading there, and to the question “why get a degree if not for work”, I presented a potential future option.

> I could still see that proof being important.

This is key to the point I was trying to make. Essentially that the purpose of education may change over time, but the value of gaining an education will still be there in one form or another.

[hooande]

um. if you're just learning for learning's sake... why do you need to prove that to anyone?

[haswell]

For the same reason people care about official records when they participate in/compete in many activities, e.g. marathon runners care about their official run times, body builders the weight they are capable of lifting, chess players their ratings, video gamers their win/loss ratio, etc.

If learning is “merely” a diversion, I don’t see why people would think about it any differently. Whether or not it still makes sense for that proof to carry a six figure price tag is a separate conversation.