|
|
|
|
|
by pc86
798 days ago
|
|
The world does not want for lack of Political Science graduates. It's pretty high on the list of "I have no idea what to study but I need a degree" choices, as evidenced by me gravitating toward it after successively eliminating basically everything else (except, ironically, Computer Science, which would have served me much better in hindsight). Poli Sci is - perhaps not surprisingly - a lot like law where there are pretty good jobs you can get that the degree prepares you decently well for even at the undergrad level. The problem is there are 10 applicants for every one of those jobs, so they come with long hours and subsistence wages. It is objectively a "dumb" thing to do to bank that you'll be one of the minority who gets a job and you'll survive the grind long enough to make a decent living. So there can be systemic issues where we make it way too easy for people who don't really care about politics, or gender, or contemporary French literature, to get a degree in that which is by almost all definitions a worthless piece of paper. And there can also be lack of personal responsibility on the part of that person when they've graduated a decade prior, have never gotten a job relevant to their degree, and think their debt should be forgiven because it's hard to pay it back. |
|
I don't know about that. I think our electorate could use a lot more political science education. In any case, your statement takes for granted the student loan system. Would the world want for lack of polisci graduates if there were no student loans?
> It's pretty high on the list of "I have no idea what to study but I need a degree" choices, as evidenced by me gravitating toward it after successively eliminating basically everything else
That's just your personal anecdote. My personal ancedote is that I also got a degree in political science, and it was because I was genuinely interested in political science.
> It is objectively a "dumb" thing to do to bank that you'll be one of the minority who gets a job and you'll survive the grind long enough to make a decent living.
I would say objectively "risky" rather than dumb. It does pay off for some. Would you say the "winners" were dumb? Would you say that professional athletes who are now fabulously wealthy are dumb because it's "dumb" to pursue a career where most people fail?