Hacker News Reader

Comment by ceejayoz | Hacker News Reader

> why do they get public money at all?

Because we still believe there to be a societal benefit to an educated populace.

More than that: the market doesn't see past quarterly earnings. Private industry spends a lot on R&D but next to nothing on basic research [0]. Dollar for dollar, academic research that is not beholden to shareholder value theory produces science that is more useful for society.

0. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20201/u-s-r-d-performance-and-...

Pick a random 18 year old and see if they can point to the country of Argentina on a map. The populace can read but not much else.

Speaking as a person confident that I could point out Argentina on a map, why is geographic trivia a very important topic? I'd rather have a population with a good understanding of means and medians, thermodynamics, and the relationship between rates and accumulations, than one that can readily tell me the year that William the Conqueror invaded England.

I agree but the point is that knowledge of the countries of the world is the most basic sign of education besides reading. The average 18 year old knows even less about science than geography. But geography is important because not knowing it is extremely embarrassing.

Knowledge about other countries is useful, geography less so. It would be just as embarrassing to have a conversation with an Argentinian and say "so what's it like living near Chile?"

Because literacy and numeracy are necessary but not sufficient for an educated polity. A good understanding of society, of history, of philosophy, and more all factor in. As do good critical thinking skills.

...and before widespread public education, many of them couldn't even read.

Don't speak for the rest of us please. I personally believe there to be a massive societal disadvantage to the existence of "educational institutions" with hidden political agendas.

You can believe anything you like, and it's a little silly to read "we" in my comment as "without even a single individual exception".

We, society, currently elect representatives who see fit to continue funding a public educational system of schools and universities, which can be inferred to be a general acceptance of their value.

And we, the society, are outraged at the blatant abuse of power we are witnessing in this article. We are shocked by how our current system may have critical vulnerabilities that compromise it's ability to deliver the education it promised, and are ready to discuss which aspect of the status quo may need to be improved upon.

All that may be true; we'll have to see if society kicks up enough of a fuss. I hope it does in this case.

I'm not sure how you get from "this university did a bad thing" to "we should get rid of public universities", though.

The issue is not getting rid of public universities.

The issue is huge partisanship which has distorted academia from their mission.

Then why do you feel qualified to speak for me?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com