The Indian and his insatiable appetite for the college degree | Hacker News Reader

The Indian and his insatiable appetite for the college degree

medium.com

124 pointsstephenhacking83 comments

The fact that a formal engineering/MBA education isn't a prerequisite for business success is almost a tautology now, especially among software startups. So there is nothing new here.

There are some half-truths though:

> For some reasons, Indians just can’t deal with the fact that someone without pedigree can get somewhere in life.

- Airtel, India's largest telecom company, was started by Sunil Mittal, armed with just a Bachelor of Arts degree from a second-rung university.

- Reliance Industries, India's largest private conglomerate, was started by Dhirubhai Ambani, had no college degree.

- The Zee TV group, one of India's largest media and entertainment conglomerates, was started by Subhash Chandra, who dropped out of school after class 12.

- There are many more multi-billion dollar enterprises like Adani and Sobha, that were founded by entrepreneurs without college degrees.

- Quickheal, India's largest anti-virus company, was founded by Kailash Katkar, never studied after school.

- Maxx Mobile, one of the leading low-cost phone makers in India was founded by Ajay Agarwal, a class 9 dropout.

I could go on.

By insisting that Indians "just can't deal with entrepreneurs without pedigree", the author is at best being disingenuous, or at worst slaying a straw man only to elevate his own achievements.

Finally, the stereotyping in the linkbait title, "The Indian and his insatiable..." doesn't help. As others have already pointed out, people (not just Indians, but around the world) make career/education choices in response to the financial/cultural environment around them.

To the average middle-class parents who grew up dealing with scarcity, low incomes, corruption and limited opportunities, the "multi-national job" represents stability, meritocracy, global opportunities and a respectable income.

There really is no reason to belittle them for their choices.

I would hardly say that he is belittling people in the situation you describe. What he is attempting to discourage is the mentality that sticks to the dogmatic cultural position even in the face of a) historical data indicating that academic pedigree isn't a rock-solid predictor of success, and b) local data indicating a higher than average likelihood of success for the individual in question.

This is a specific example of a problem that every culture faces, which is cultural memes that have taken on the form of divine wisdom. Not everyone will be Mittal or Gates, in fact that population is a statistically non-existent one; that doesn't mean that dropping out of college to run a startup is the worst idea for any given person. Any culture shutting off that opportunity regardless of the specific case will cost itself in lost opportunities.

And as an aside on the specific content, I am not Indian, but reading this I couldn't help but remember my Indian friends' impressions of their aunts and uncles admonishing them for doing something insane like getting an advanced economic degree when they could have been a doctor or engineer.

>>academic pedigree isn't a rock-solid predictor of success

Definition of success is extremely difficult to be given here.

I will give you a small example. Literacy is a big problem in India. Unfortunately since you can't read or write, your access to information is limited. This puts things like news papers and magazines outside your reach. Access to any kind of information will be weak(Access to information is the most thing for a person in the modern world)- You won't be able to make well informed decisions about anything, your knowledge of current affairs will be weak. Ultimately such a mass of people won't be able to make it big.

This is why basic education should be compulsory. Also these days knowledge of the English language is extremely important to do any work with people of other nations. English is not our native language or mother tongue. So we learn it only in schools.

Clearly neither me nor OP is arguing against basic education. Nor that college or advanced degrees are a good thing, so please get rid of that straw man fast.

Additionally, the discussion on the authors post was primarily about those who have developed some capability to "do" either outside the conventional school system or at a particularly early point. This clearly limits the applicability of the discussion to those who have in some fashion achieved access to information and processed it well. This likely rules out illiterate people, non-English speakers (specifically in Tech) and many others from the discussion. I am not saying that their exclusion from information is a good thing, clearly it is not. However, taking the median Indian and saying that the best move in their situation should be encouraged universally is clearly wrong, as is doing so in any culture/country, and I interpreted the article to only be complaining about the dogmatic attachment to that "best path" even in the face of demonstrated success.

Dissing average Indian middle-class parents for wanting a college education and MNC job for their children, without even a cursory attempt to understand why they do so, is belittling them.

If the author truly wanted to "discourage the mentality" (your words), then he ought to at least have understood the mentality to begin with. Or provided some solid reasons as to why Indian parents ought not to insist on a college education, instead of just his ("upper middle class") isolated example.

There are many countries, just like India, where exactly the same thing happens. There are countless examples of people who live a wealthy life (this tends to be the common denominator of success in societies where poverty is rampant), but most of the middle- and lower-class inhabitants are convinced you can't get anywhere unless you're at the top of your class.

Folk statistics doesn't work the way you describe it. I know it's frustrating to watch, but it simply is that way.

I agree. The preference for stable, well-paid, predictable careers is a global phenomenon, and especially in poorer countries.

And had this article been nuanced about that (as many earlier articles and posts on this topic have been in the past), it would have been okay.

Instead it reduces it to some kind of peculiar Indian trait ("The Indian and his insatiable...") while painting the second most populous country in the world with the widest of brushes ("Indians just can’t deal with the fact that someone without pedigree can get somewhere in life").

My statistics weren't meant to prove the opposite, that India is somehow very startup/failure friendly (it isn't, not by a long shot), but to only disprove the author's sweeping claim that the lack of a pedigree is some unsurmountable obstacle to succeed in India.

Sure the average VC or bank manager or prospective in-law might value an education over none (assuming ceteris paribus), but let's not use that to completely devalue the importance of a formal college education totally.

Is all.

> Instead it reduces it to some kind of peculiar Indian trait ("The Indian and his insatiable...") while painting the second most populous country in the world with the widest of brushes ("Indians just can’t deal with the fact that someone without pedigree can get somewhere in life").

Large, densely populated areas tend to be more culturally homogenous than smaller, more spread-out ones. So the idea isn't totally outlandish.

>but to only disprove the author's sweeping claim that the lack of a pedigree is some unsurmountable obstacle to succeed in India.

I didn't get that from reading the OP's article at all. I heard him saying that the lack of a pedigree is perceived by people in India as an insurmountable obstacle. You may disagree with that. Personally, I have no idea. But there's a difference between what you're accusing him of saying and what he actually said.

>I could go on.

You should, and in the way cite some statistics or else you would be falling for this common logical fallacy:

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

A single counterexample is enough to refute a universal claim.

It certainly isn't a universal claim.

But multiple examples provide only a skewed dataset.

Completely agree. The average Indian middle class parent has a lot of other beliefs too which are comfortably side-stepped by their children. In my personal experience, many people use their parents' views as an excuse for their own lack of conviction in what they want to do.

The examples you point out only make this obsession sadder and more ironic, though. In other words, it can be the case that all of your examples are true and people in India still are obsessed with the MBA or engineering degree.

I don't see anything sad or ironic. As pointed out, these examples are outliers. How many others failed to make it and were so indebted that they could never dare to venture again? The concept of personal bankruptcy does not exist in India. Being an entrepreneur in India is much harder than in the US.

Firstly being entrepreneur and going to college are not orthogonal goals.

Secondly for any poor person in India, without any funding or support. No infrastructure, no exposure and having to fight a historic burden of poverty in the family. Not getting a college education means, the guy will eventually end up working at a tailor's shop or a garage or driver. Working whole life only to hope his son breaks of the cycle of poverty in the next generation.

Contrary to whatever you might think, you can't hard-work your way out of all problems all the time, I know that from personal experience. For a rich person a big financial failure means, a good decent chance to start up again. For a lower middle class person such a failure means, the end of life. Full Stop! Because the debts will drown you till you reach your grave.

The fact is for any lower middle/class and poor person. Getting a decent education is the easiest way to get a job, and then use that money to bootstrap their projects or start up.

You might not learn anything in a college, or a degree might not prep you up for prime time rock star development shops. But it will get you a job, buy you some financial freedom. And then you will have good enough time to iteratively learn and bootstrap your own business.

And beyond all, not everyone's family can write them a check to start something their teens or at any age. Most people live so hand to mouth, without a monthly salary they are pretty much bust!

Before criticizing some one please take into note the fact, they don't enjoy the same privileges and benefits as your do.

>> Getting a decent "education" is the easiest way to get a job

The traditional education system WAS the easiest way to get a job. Nowadays, it is the easiest way NOT to get a job.

Step 1: Download the 10 books x 4 (years) = 40 books of the average university degree. Step 2: Unless it's mathematics, it is just literature. Read it. Step 3: Sit the 10 x 4 exams at an online college.

In most developed countries, you have just managed NOT to spend 100 000 USD and NOT to waste 4 years of your life. All of this sounds useless, and it probably is equally useless, but at least it is not as time-consuming nor as expensive as the traditional alternative.

You might not learn much by going to college, but looking at it that way you might not learn it anywhere. To learn you need many things. Things like interest, ability to spend time and effort doing and learning things. This is not just restricted to college. There must be some motivation to learn. For us, learning is tied to money in a very direct sense. For students, their motivation might be curiosity.

Let me ask every one a simple question. If you believe you didn't learn much at college. Now that you are out of college why haven't you turned into a knowledge bank? If you ponder at that question long enough you will eventually realize there is nothing really wrong with college anyway.

Coming to your original point, unfortunately degrees matter in our society. Like you I believe that we must do away with that system and look at learning and the ability to perform instead.

Here in India, you can't even get a job interview if you don't have a degree. So we are stuck in this degree system, and probably will be decades to come.

you have clearly never lived in india. you absolutely need a college degree to be even considered for most decent jobs.

He didn't say you should not get a college degree, he said you can get a (legitimate) degree in less time and for much, much less money if you study by yourself and only go to an actual brick-and-mortar college to take the final tests.

Going to school or college is much more than just passing the tests. The human interaction, the relationships you form, the ideas you will be exposed to, the things you will learn to avoid... There's value in the education process that goes well beyond the final certificate.

Sure - but you can probably get similar experiences in other ways as well, again for much less money.

Yes, you can always think up some way to get the same benefit, but the point is that for most people, going to college is a good way to get a well-rounded education that involves being exposed to a range of ideas and people. Can a dedicated person figure out a cheaper alternative? Possibly, but that's beside the point.

In most developed countries, you have just managed NOT to spend 100 000 USD

In most developed countries, college is much cheaper than that (to the student). I paid $1400/year to attend a respected university.

If you get thousands of job applicants, then it's appropriate to throw 90% CV's out in the first filter by a cursory browsing of the CV. If you don't have a degree, then in such a situation you won't even get an opportunity to be interviewed.

Tuition for online colleges is still expensive. University of Phoenix charges tuition of $12k - 15k per year. Strayer and DeVry charge even more. If you want to go to an accredited online school, it can be more flexible, but I don't think it's orders of magnitude cheaper.

I agree. It's hard to see the usefullness of a degree in a poor 3rd world country if you wasn't born in one. Nowadays it's possible to be an entrepeneur with somebody elses money, the internet, kickstater and the apple app-store, but all those things are unavailable in india.

In a huge 3rd world country, a degree is obviously useful. It's a gov-issued certification, a way to transfer trust from the person having the degree to the government. You don't need to trust the guy because the government says he can code. If you don't see why that's useful probably you never had 10000 applications sent to you.

The problem with degree inflation is the same as any other kind of inflation, it lowers (devaluates?) the value of the degree.

Nowadays it's possible to be an entrepeneur with somebody elses money

A good point, the argument for a college degree becomes quite a lot more compelling then as starting a company is almost right out...

The reason for emphasis on education in India is because for most families getting their children educated and a job is the least risk way to have a better life style. The author seems to conveniently forget that most Indian family cannot afford a computer, let alone one with internet. Even if their parent make it available to their children, that would have cost an arm and leg for them. The risk of not going to college and getting into business is something they cannot afford, because a failure in this case would follow them till death. The author seems to be of the view that others are narrow minded, while he himself is not able to see beyond his situation. Congrats for succeeding without a college degree, but do not go about belittling others (especially his teachers!), for they know the ground realities better. As kamaal said using the money from job to bootstrap is the best way for many youngsters from my generation at least.

> For a lower middle class person such a failure means, the end of life. Full Stop! Because the debts will drown you till you reach your grave.

Debts? Does India not have limited-liability corporations? In rational countries, when your business idea fails, you just throw away the company and start another.

VC's have been around in India since early 90's, may be late 80's.

But businesses are still stuck in the concept of loans. Its like you take a loan to buy your home(Or if I'm right its called mortgage in the US). Businesses pretty much run on loans. So things get super risky, when you factor in failure. Because lenders are expecting principle amount + interests in returns, and you have to often give some thing as a guarantee(for eg: a house, or a plot) which remains with the lender till you return the amount.

I think the trends are changing now. I heard a senior VC talk at a start up conference here in Bangalore. One of the main reasons why entrepreneurship never took off in India was because people had to deal with what-after-failure scenarios, and then it ends there. If the venture is too risky there is hardly any point trying.

You are correct, "mortgage" is the colloquial term used in the USA to refer to home loans.

The lower middle class person's venture alluded to in the parent comment is most definitely not going to be anything remotely resembling an LLC. These ventures are more like "Autorickshaw Driving" or "neighborhood grocery shack" than "Instagram for dogs". The business is probably not registered anywhere and the loan is obtained at usurious rates from the neighborhood money lender who has the leverage of muscle-power or contacts to make you pay up. Of course this varies depending on where in the urban/rural lower-middleclass spectrum the entrepreneur falls under, but you get the point.

Though what you are saying is true. I've found the same even with regards to tech start ups.

The situation is no way close to that in the US. In fact even to get anything close to an angel investment you need at least an IIT or an IIM degree. Ask this to anyone trying to bootstrap. Alumni connections are very important, if not that you at least need to be some how networked to a VC. I've had personal experiences with all these.

The best bet for any Indian entrepreneur is either raising money from family(If they are rich enough to fund you) or really bootstrap it as a side project and grow it out.

Either way being an entrepreneur is not for the faint hearted in India. If you are bootstrapping in your side, you will likely work 19 hrs a day and face failure after failure with nearly everyone around finding reasons to make you and your decisions look stupid. At the same time you see guys not even 1/100th the worth climbing the corporate ladder and taking obscene salaries back home just because they happen to be good politicians.

It just all boils down to one word, Persistence. Keep trying. Its not about winning or losing, you just have to show up every day and put up a fight. Eventually you will make it.

> If you are bootstrapping in your side, you will likely work 19 hrs a day and face failure after failure with nearly everyone around finding reasons to make you and your decisions look stupid.

Great point. This is actually not constrained to India but propagate through most of Asia, including the generally rich Singapore. Seems like a favorite "past-time" to watch people fail. It's a society that lives by the saying "the nail that sticks out gets hammered down".

Which is why Silicon Valley is such an attractive place to pursue a startup. The support system is there and there are little social stigma attached to failure.

Failing after putting in all the long hours and weekends is not something that is easy to stomach alone. Failing and having everyone around you rub it in is brutal.

You're thinking about it from a very structured, Western viewpoint. Not every business is funded by a loan from the bank. Some businesses are funded by the owner's hard work, savings, and maybe a side job. If that business fails, the owner may wind up out of a lot of their savings and in debt simply due to basic life necessities.

India has practically no social security as well. Your definition of "Rational" does not come into play.

I really wish I could upvote your answer more. This is the side of the discussion that most people seem to be missing.

This does not take away anything from the author, his entrepreneurship and his overall success, mind you. However, the points made by ~kamaal and everyone else in this thread are extremely valid. They represent the part of India that is not so 'shining'.

I myself fall in the same category as the author. I chose to drop out of my Masters in Physics (with an elective in Astrophysics) and went to work as a Radio Show host for a commercial radio station. It was made possible only because of an invisible fallback option that my parents provided. Without it, I would probably be working away at a 9 to 5 job writing uninspired code for some company rather than sitting at home trying my hand at programming with Python.

Wait.

Oh, shit.

This is not confined to India; this is - broadly and generally speaking - also a condition in lower class USA, particularly if the individuals aren't hustlers or have contact with people who understand money.

Source: Anecdotes and reading lots of news articles.

This isn't specific to Indian culture. There are several cultures that will emphasize college degrees over entrepreneurship. I know this is hard to understand from a fairly successful entrepreneur's perspective but the cold hard truth is that most entrepreneurs fail. This is what causes the whole 'it's safer to get a college degree' mentality.

I've been an entrepreneur (fairly successful) since I was 13. Yet my folks said I should get a college degree. I did get an engineering degree while 'entrepreneuring' at the same time. Does my degree help me in any direct way ? Nope. But there are several indirect benefits that a degree can get you first amongst which are that in general people think you are capable and well educated. I don't personally subscribe to this thought process but hey, we have to live in this world with everyone else, right ? My degree has opened doors for me and made some people take me more seriously. It has had zero practical contribution towards my endeavors but sometimes opening a door is all it takes. Not only people but even governments sometimes want certain degrees for certain categories of work permits (even if it's totally irrelevant to your work but a degree helps you). Then of course you have the benefits of an alumni network, etc etc. but those are really what you make of them because you can network otherwise as well. But a degree is a formal qualification - treated as such by society and the government. Does it mean you know more ? Probably not. Do people in general think you do ? Probably yes.

I'd still say that in the world today, a college degree matters a lot depending on who you are talking to. It won't matter if you're talking to me but there are a lot of people out there who care about whether you have one or not.

> Indians just can’t deal with the fact that someone without pedigree can get somewhere in life.

I am not Indian, nor have I spent time in India, so I hope I am right in thinking that this speaks to present growing pains in Indian tech culture. I say growing pains because I think, and hope, that this valuation of pedigree over merit is coming to an end, as it is already at an end in parts of the U.S.

There are, if I may say so, a lot of bad Indian programmers. They’re bad not because they’re Indian, of course, but because they don’t really want to be programmers. It’s a career option. Engineering and business are things you study in school because they’re where money and prestige are. But studying in school and learning are entirely different things.

> The only way your son is ever going to succeed being an entrepreneur is by getting himself an MBA.

I want to believe that this, though it be the present, is not the future of Indian tech entrepreneurship.

There are, if I may say so, a lot of bad Indian programmers. They’re bad not because they’re Indian, of course, but because they don’t really want to be programmers.

I observed long ago that (in my Silicon Valley experience) white American programmers were always good programmers, because white Americans only become programmers if they really want to be programmers. The same cannot always be said of other nationalities and ethnic groups.

At least, that's been true until now. The glamorization of programming and the advent of 10-week programming cram courses may change things.

You're likely going to get some knee-jerk flak from people who misunderstand what you're trying to say, but from experience (I'm ethnic Sinhalese), I can say that this can be attributed to what exactly constitutes "programming" in those cultures (this transcends race and nationality BTW).

If by "programming", you mean putting together a website and the like, then yes, there is a huge swath of people who are semi-qualified to do anything else, but get drafted to do more anyway. If by "programming", you mean problem solving and innovation where writing code is actually one of the last things to be done, then most people will consider that to be a smaller subset.

Wow... thats so true!

So my family is from Bangladesh. My aunt and uncle moved to Toronto. My cousin wants to study business and get an MBA, but his parents want him to study electrical engineering. I didn't get it, until I realized its all about risk aversion. An engineering degree is a secure path to the middle class. A business degree isn't, and entrerpeneurship certainly isn't. The business degree might have a higher potential reward, but middle of the class engineers still get jobs.

I find it fascinating that engineering is now seen as a secure path to middle class.

When I was in college, construction was a secure path to middle class, and engineering was something reserved for folks who wanted to make 300k, but work 80 hours a week, a decidedly not-middle-class work ethic.

There are two distinctions here: between America and India/Bangladesh, and between then and now. Construction or industrial work in South Asia was never a secure path to the middle class. Education has long been the way forward in those countries. In the U.S., skilled blue collar work was considered a path to the middle class, but those days are long behind us.

Today, in the U.S. engineering presents a secure alternative to liberal arts degrees and living with one's parents, just it has historically presented an alternative to manual labor in South Asia.

I agree it's perfectly possible to get somewhere as an entrepreneur without a college degree. But it's hardly detrimental to have one either.

And I'm kind of sick of the US-centric view that all college degrees cost $100,000+ -- many high quality degrees in other western countries cost as little as 10-20% of this figure (and often are paid for in a deferred payment scheme). As with so many things (like healthcare) it's just another area the US seems to have gone insane with.

> And I'm kind of sick of the US-centric view that all college degrees cost $100,000+ -- many high quality degrees in other western countries cost as little as 10-20% of this figure

It doesn't seem out of line to me. The average high school graduate in Canada will earn about $30,000 per year during the typical age one goes to university. Assuming a degree takes four years, that is a cost of $120,000 right there, ignoring any other fees that may be associated with enrolment.

Just like you even I wanted to dropout and start something I wanted or wished to do. My parents aren't too conservative. But my dad told me something which I believe is very true - "Getting a degree is highly rewarding. If tomorrow your business crashes, you'd at least have a degree to back you up with a job. Degree is for your secure future not to please the society around you". No doubt this is true. And as my dad said, its more for you than anyone else. But again its more than that, getting a degree pays more than just societal status and a more savvy future. That being said, I personally want to know each and every specific topic in full depth. And I believe that can only happen with a proper mentor over me and like-minded peers around me. In other words, in a "university". Plus college helps you with many other things in "life" and not just academically. But then it depends on what you want to do and accordingly it matters if a degree is worth it or not.

I hope students (especially) take this post in the right gesture. Dropping out is not the best solution always. Doesn't work for everyone. Its not cool to dropout because Zuck, Gates and Jobs did. You "have to have" a strong reason why university isnt the best option for you.

+1 otherwise for the post. Good to know you had the support you needed. Doesn't happen with everyone. All the best ;)

I see college as a learning place. A place where you learn about everything but study topics. College is the place where I met my co-founder.

It is really a great place where you can meet new talented people, learn how to work in a team. Its a place where you can have fights, fall and learn again.

It is the place where you learn to present your Idea by presenting it among your friends first. They can help if you lack something. This kind of things are usually not very easy in the outside world. Because the outside world is busy competing with you.

You meet so many types of people that you learn to categories the people. What kind of people are A Grade and what kind are B grade. This helps you to when you will start hiring.

You say going to college is not worth it. Well another big problem with our thinking is that we think that college is just to learn the "courses". Well its not. Its a lot more than that. I am also a student in one of the most reputable colleges in India, but the way I think, learning is just a state of mind, place doesn't matter. I myself use to think that i have wasted my 4 years learning computer science, that I could have learnt all this in just a year and a half, but today as I am trying to build my startup, I understand that this all connect dots. Even I am not interested in grades at all, but i never stop working on my startup.

So, As I see it, college is like a big sand ground, where you can fall, again and again, and learn to fight. And all this without hurting yourself.

you said "one of the most reputable colleges in India"... and your statements stand true for those kinda colleges... Let me remind you - those are few - very few.... for all the other colleges - I agree with the author - Those "other" kinda colleges are in huge numbers - they produce quantity without quality and as a result many people see India's out-of-college talent "unusable" ... and they result into bad programmers/(engineers/lawyers/doctors/whatever-profession)... and they also result into bad teachers - and the loop goes on...

I think people underestimate the systemic restrictions placed on the Indian Middle Class, and fail to realise the connection to a larger problem India faces, viz. drastic shortage.

You want to become a doctor? Too bad you don't have an MBBS. We don't care whether you decided to become one only during college, and are willing to spend a few extra years catching up.

Except for diplomas (by which I mean qualifications like CA, which you theoretically could get without attending classes at a college) doesn't place a prerequisite on having a degree. Every master's program I have come across requires a bachelor's degree. Some are more flexible, admitting degrees outside the relevant fields. But most are not.

The reason is pretty simple : In a country like India where anything good suffers a big shortage, people generally prefer to stick to rules, creating many false negatives. This is because no one wants to take up liability in case a false negative crops up. "I followed all the regulations and suggestions," they say.

So anything that involves an expected, and common path ends up needing college degrees as prerequisites. For the Middle Class which cannot afford to wait out a few years, they have no choice but to toe the line. Only if you have any capital (and in India, connections) to begin with, can you expect to change the system. (The author here is a businessman in the crudest sense : not a very conventional career path in a lot of families).

My parents generation mostly got their jobs before the liberalisation of the economy in 1991. In those days, a lot of people dreamed of government jobs : stable, decent paying, and allows you to slack off. In spite of globalisation, we cannot expect their mindset to change a lot after they've fought so badly for jobs, right? This old mindset comes into play when they suggest us to go to college : they've seen decades of public sector employment, this new path (entrepreneurship) seems new, and they honestly believe they are trying to help you. There is no ill-will here.

I do agree one can still earn a good living without college in India too. But I feel what I said has a considerable effect in societal status of middle class people (most of whom are not extraordinary), and this in turn makes people want the college degree.

First they got me to go to a college - I really dint want to go - wanted to start "something on my own" - pretty weak argument - I din't have any idea. Then they insisted to go to a Master - bcoz you need to get above the crowd - and I got into one of the best institutes - that made it even harder to dropout even when I knew after 6 months that I was wasting time

Then I jumped into entrepreneurship - And they insisted that I should get a job to get a hands-on experience. I gave up after 8 months - to their preferences - but this is when I started seeing success, but couldn't prove it to them. They didn't see it as "lasting"

Today, even at this moment, I can feel "the burden of giving up" because most people around me "insisted" on doing something I dint want to do. Ultimately, I am to blame.

10 years later - I am pretty successful in my career, with a job. My job is not "secure" as they mentioned. Its not satisfying and frequently frustrating. I know no "other job" can fix that ... I want to take the jump into entrepreneurship again - and I am doing whatever I can. And many times I wish I could undo that mistake I made 10 years back. It is seriously less riskier and easier to start young rather than doing it after you are a husband/father/etc.

As far as Education is concerned - That is important. But Degree! - I know most universities in India will give you degrees that don't speak for your talent/skill. It just shows that you passed your exams - and if you have extra money - some universities will give you a degree without you reading a single line.

I have been pondering about this for a while and have developed a hypothesis as to why Indian parents (and those from similar nations) tend to overvalue college degrees.

It is mostly due to the parents having low self-esteem. It comes down to the following two facts:

(1) While there are plenty of exceptionally capable young individuals like OP who have been proving everyone wrong, it usually takes a lot of parental skill and know-how to produce a wunderkind with social skills necessary to navigate the adult world in a foreign country.

(2) Parents who are recent immigrants (especially from poorer nations or from nations with significant cultural differences from the host nation) do not see themselves as capable of providing that know-how. Note that I did not say they can't provide it -- just that they do not see themselves as capable to (it turns out that more often than not they underestimate themselves).

Therefore, if you are a parent in a similar situation, it (often wrongly) appears to you that the only way your children stand a fighting chance is if you they spend as much time in school as possible. Then, of course, is the social pressure from family friends.

>>But, something he said really shocked me. It goes like this — “Oh, my sister’s kid is just like you. He’s got a $10,000 grant to go build a business and he’s in the 10th grade. My sister asked me what she should do. I told her to ask him to focus on finishing his college first before doing anything else.”

I don't find this particularly shocking. Without knowing the particulars of this kid, it sounds like pretty sane advice to a 16 year old - finish your education. School, strangely enough, gives people a lot of free time too, probably more than a full-time job does. It's possible to get an education, and dabble in entrepreneurship, and find friends who gel with you enough to make you might want to take on as partners. Someone with the aptitude for entrepreneurship will likely find a way to do all that while getting an education, but it's not irresponsible for a parent or guardian to encourage kids to focus on their education -- Just because some kids turn out to be successful dropout-entrepreneurs doesn't mean that dropping out at the first opportunity is a well-defined path to success.

Speaking as Pakistani in his early twenties, I can confirm that I get asked many of the same questions. I have a B.S. in Computer Science right now, but frequently get asked "When are you getting your MBA?" by family members. I hate how the question always implies that I will undoubtedly be pursuing one.

Since many of the comments here seem to miss the op's point:

He is saying that Indians seem to think that you need a degree to be successful, and discount the entrepreneur category by itself. He clearly thinks this is untrue and a counterproductive attitude, but there it is.

He is probably bringing it up because it is hard enough to be an entrepreneur without people constantly telling you that you will fail for one arbitrary reason or another.

By the way, this holds pretty much true in the United States -- most middle- and upper-class people think you need a degree to succeed.

But the entrepreneur category is probably given more respect. E.g. my friend's daughter is postponing college to work on her startup - she mostly getting very positive reinforcement all around.

Caste system it is all about qualification. Only trader community can trade. Only priest community can pray. Now hereditary qualification a has given way a little bit to official qualifications. Qualifications gets precedence over skill.

I really dislike articles that generalize based on race, religion, sex, etc. It's inappropriate and says nothing about individuals (all of whom are unique).

When you're researching a large nation with more than a billion people, you'll find a lot of people who have degrees and a lot of people who do not and a lot of people who like chewing gum and (again) a lot of people who do not.

The only thing the results should tell you is that there are a lot of people there. They say nothing about the average individual.

While individuals are different, valid and useful generalizations do exist. Growing up (and living in) Indian culture is different from growing up and living in the US, which is different from Japan, from Germany, etc.

I assume you are in the US. If you met an Indian person and evaluated his relationships and belief systems based on your American standards, you'd get a very misleading picture. You need to understand cultural context.

I have regrets on going to college when in 2001 I was a good coder and running a successful/profitable gaming oriented website/community. I was heavily discouraged from that path and it set me back a bit, when I got back into coding in 2005 I felt like a dinosaur. College was neat though.

Why didn't you continue running your website while in college ? I did that and it worked out okay for me.

Really loved the article Ashwin. So true. Specially the para:

For some reasons, Indians just can’t deal with the fact that someone without pedigree can get somewhere in life. It’s unbelievable that you can be a good programmer, successful businessman or great marketer without an {insert random college degree here}.

This is pretty much the way of the world, not just in India. The 'safe' route is to get a technical degree, work for a large corporation, and hopefully retire some day. Can't blame parents for wanting to shield their children from risk and potential failure...

Well, you were lucky your parents let you skip out on college. I was kind of forced to do engineering. Even when I got into a rather crappy college (I had started working for a start-up which never took off rather than study for entrance exams). But hey, whatever.

All entrepreneurs are not successful..Not just India but every where middle class families force their children to study well and do a corporate job rather jump to the place where success is less than 20%..

20%? In a country as business friendly as the USA, only 10% of businesses last over 5 years. India is a rougher business environment so I would assume the rate of success is way below 20% (probably 5%)

Not sure about education, but Indian developers tend to be very proud of their job titles. I had to formally become 'senior super developer' so they would not look down on me.

Indian here but on the other side of this. Got MS, MBA, and currently thinking about Doctorate. May or may-not do a startup.

Where there is a will , there is a way!!1

From Think on These Things (aka This Matter of Culture), by Jiddu Krishnamurti - http://books.google.it/books?id=IsldnzHkxpsC&lpg=PP1&dq=thin...

Chapter 1 - The Function of Education -------------------------------------

I WONDER IF we have ever asked ourselves what education means. Why do we go to school, why do we learn various subjects, why do we pass examinations and compete with each other for better grades? What does this so-called education mean, and what is it all about? This is really a very important question, not only for the students, but also for the parents, for the teachers, and for everyone who loves this earth. Why do we go through the struggle to be educated? Is it merely in order to pass some examinations and get a job? Or is it the function of education to prepare us while we are young to understand the whole process of life? Having a job and earning one's livelihood is necessary but is that all? Are we being educated only for that? Surely, life is not merely a job, an occupation; life is something extraordinarily wide and profound, it is a great mystery, a vast realm in which we function as human beings. If we merely prepare ourselves to earn a livelihood, we shall miss the whole point of life; and to understand life is much more important than merely to prepare for examinations and become very proficient in mathematics, physics, or what you will.

So, whether we are teachers or students, is it not important to ask ourselves why we are educating or being educated? And what does life mean? Is not life an extraordinary thing? The birds, the flowers, the flourishing trees, the heavens, the stars, the rivers and the fish therein - all this is life. Life is the poor and the rich; life is the constant battle between groups, races and nations; life is meditation; life is what we call religion, and it is also the subtle, hidden things of the mind - the envies, the ambitions, the passions, the fears, fulfilments and anxieties. All this and much more is life. But we generally prepare ourselves to understand only one small corner of it. We pass certain examinations, find a job, get married, have children, and then become more and more like machines. We remain fearful, anxious, frightened of life. So, is it the function of education to help us understand the whole process of life, or is it merely to prepare us for a vocation, for the best job we can get?

What is going to happen to all of us when we grow to be men and women? Have you ever asked yourselves what you are going to do when you grow up? In all likelihood you will get married, and before you know where you are you will be mothers and fathers; and you will then be tied to a job, or to the kitchen, in which you will gradually wither away. Is that all that your life is going to be? Have you ever asked yourselves this question? Should you not ask it? If your family is wealthy you may have a fairly good position already assured, your father may give you a comfortable job, or you may get richly married; but there also you will decay, deteriorate. Do you see?

Surely, education has no meaning unless it helps you to understand the vast expanse of life with all its subtleties, with its extraordinary beauty, its sorrows and joys. You may earn degrees, you may have a series of letters after your name and land a very good job; but then what? What is the point of it all if in the process your mind becomes dull, weary, stupid? So, while you are young, must you not seek to find out what life is all about? And is it not the true function of education to cultivate in you the intelligence which will try to find the answer to all these problems? Do you know what intelligence is? It is the capacity, surely, to think freely without fear, without a formula, so that you begin to discover for yourself what is real, what is true; but if you are frightened you will never be intelligent. Any form of ambition, spiritual or mundane, breeds anxiety, fear; therefore ambition does not help to bring about a mind that is clear, simple, direct, and hence intelligent.

You know, it is really very important while you are young to live in an environment in which there is no fear. Most of us, as we grow older, become frightened; we are afraid of living, afraid of losing a job, afraid of tradition, afraid of what the neighbours, or what the wife or husband would say, afraid of death. Most of us have fear in one form or another; and where there is fear there is no intelligence. And is it not possible for all of us, while we are young, to be in an environment where there is no fear but rather an atmosphere of freedom freedom, not just to do what we like, but to understand the whole process of living? Life is really very beautiful, it is not this ugly thing that we have made of it; and you can appreciate its richness, its depth, its extraordinary loveliness only when you revolt against everything - against organized religion, against tradition, against the present rotten society - so that you as a human being find out for yourself what is true. Not to imitate but to discover - that is education, is it not? It is very easy to conform to what your society or your parents and teachers tell you. That is a safe and easy way of existing; but that is not living, because in it there is fear, decay, death. To live is to find out for yourself what is true, and you can do this only when there is freedom, when there is continuous revolution inwardly, within yourself.

But you are not encouraged to do this; no one tells you to question, to find out for yourself what God is, because if you were to rebel you would become a danger to all that is false. Your parents and society want you to live safely, and you also want to live safely. Living safely generally means living in imitation and therefore in fear. Surely, the function of education is to help each one of us to live freely and without fear, is it not? And to create an atmosphere in which there is no fear requires a great deal of thinking on your part as well as on the part of the teacher, the educator.

Do you know what this means - what an extraordinary thing it would be to create an atmosphere in which there is no fear? And we must create it, because we see that the world is caught up in endless wars; it is guided by politicians who are always seeking power; it is a world of lawyers, policemen and soldiers, of ambitious men and women all wanting position and all fighting each other to get it. Then there are the so-called saints, the religious gurus with their followers; they also want power, position, here or in the next life. It is a mad world, completely confused, in which the communist is fighting the capitalist, the socialist is resisting both, and everybody is against somebody, struggling to arrive at a safe place, a position of power or comfort. The world is torn by conflicting beliefs, by caste and class distinctions, by separative nationalities, by every form of stupidity and cruelty - and this is the world you are being educated to fit into. You are encouraged to fit into the framework of this disastrous society; your parents want you to do that, and you also want to fit in.

Now, is it the function of education merely to help you to conform to the pattern of this rotten social order, or is it to give you freedom - complete freedom to grow and create a different society, a new world? We want to have this freedom, not in the future, but now, otherwise we may all be destroyed. We must create immediately an atmosphere of freedom so that you can live and find out for yourselves what is true, so that you become intelligent, so that you are able to face the world and understand it, not just conform to it, so that inwardly, deeply, psychologically you are in constant revolt; because it is only those who are in constant revolt that discover what is true, not the man who conforms, who follows some tradition. It is only when you are constantly inquiring, constantly observing, constantly learning, that you find truth, God, or love; and you cannot inquire, observe, learn, you cannot be deeply aware, if you are afraid. So the function of education, surely, is to eradicate, inwardly as well as outwardly, this fear that destroys human thought, human relationship and love.

...continued: Questioner: If all individuals were in revolt, don't you think there would be chaos in the world?

Krishnamurti: Listen to the question first, because it is very important to understand the question and not just wait for an answer. The question is: if all individuals were in revolt, would not the world be in chaos? But is the present society in such perfect order that chaos would result if everyone revolted against it? Is there not chaos now? is everything beautiful, uncorrupted? Is everyone living happily, fully, richly? Is man not against man? Is there not ambition, ruthless competition? So the world is already in chaos, that is the first thing to realize. Don't take it for granted that this is an orderly society; don't mesmerize yourself with words. Whether here in Europe, in America or Russia, the world is in a process of decay. If you see the decay, you have a challenge: you are challenged to find a way of solving this urgent problem. And how you respond to the challenge is important, is it not? If you respond as a Hindu or a Buddhist, a Christian or a communist, then your response is very limited - which is no response at all. You can respond fully, adequately only if there is no fear in you, only if you don't think as a Hindu, a communist or a capitalist, but as a total human being who is trying to solve this problem; and you cannot solve it unless you yourself are in revolt against the whole thing, against the ambitious acquisitiveness on which society is based. When you yourself are not ambitious, not acquisitive, not clinging to your own security - only then can you respond to the challenge and create a new world.

Questioner: To revolt, to learn, to love - are these three separate processes, or are they simultaneous?

Krishnamurti: Of course they are not three separate processes; it is a unitary process. You see, it is very important to find out what the question means. This question is based on theory, not on experience; it is merely verbal, intellectual, therefore it has no validity. A man who is fearless, who is really in revolt, struggling to find out what it means to learn, to love - such a man does not ask if it is one process or three. We are so clever with words, and we think that by offering explanations we have solved the problem. Do you know what it means to learn? When you are really learning you are learning throughout your life and there is no one special teacher to learn from. Then everything teaches you - a dead leaf, a bird in flight, a smell, a tear, the rich and the poor, those who are crying, the smile of a woman, the haughtiness of a man. You learn from everything, therefore there is no guide, no philosopher, no guru. Life itself is your teacher, and you are in a state of constant learning.

Questioner: It is true that society is based on acquisitiveness and ambition; but if we had no ambition would we not decay?

Krishnamurti: This is really a very important question, and it needs great attention. Do you know what attention is? Let us find out. In a class room, when you stare out of the window or pull somebody's hair, the teacher tells you to pay attention. Which means what? That you are not interested in what you are studying and so the teacher compels you to pay attention - which is not attention at all. Attention comes when you are deeply interested in something, for then you love to find out all about it; then your whole mind, your whole being is there. Similarly, the moment you see that this question - if we had no ambition, would we not decay? - is really very important, you are interested and want to find out the truth of the matter. Now, is not the ambitious man destroying himself? That is the first thing to find out, not to ask whether ambition is right or wrong. Look around you, observe all the people who are ambitious. What happens when you are ambitious? You are thinking about yourself, are you not? You are cruel, you push other people aside because you are trying to fulfil your ambition, trying to become a big man, thereby creating in society the conflict between those who are succeeding and those who are falling behind. There is a constant battle between you and the others who are also after what you want; and is this conflict productive of creative living? Do you understand, or is this too difficult? Are you ambitious when you love to do something for its own sake? When you are doing something with your whole being, not because you want to get somewhere, or have more profit, or greater results, but simply because you love to do it - in that there is no ambition, is there? In that there is no competition; you are not struggling with anyone for first place. And should not education help you to find out what you really love to do so that from the beginning to the end of your life you are working at something which you feel is worth while and which for you has deep significance? Otherwise, for the rest of your days, you will be miserable. Not knowing what you really want to do, your mind falls into a routine in which there is only boredom, decay and death. That is why it is very important to find out while you are young what it is you really love to do; and this is the only way to create a new society.

Questioner: In India, as in most other countries, education is being controlled by the government. Under such circumstances is it possible to carry out an experiment of the kind you describe?

Krishnamurti: If there were no government help, would it be possible for a school of this kind to survive? That is what this gentleman is asking. He sees everything throughout the world becoming more and more controlled by governments, by politicians, by people in authority who want to shape our minds and hearts, who want us to think in a certain way. Whether in Russia or in any other country, the tendency is towards government control of education; and this gentleman asks whether it is possible for a school of the kind I am talking about to come into being without government aid. Now, what do you say? You know, if you think something is important, really worth while, you give your heart to it irrespective of governments and the edicts of society - and then it will succeed. But most of us do not give our hearts to anything, and that it why we put this sort of question. If you and I feel vitally that a new world can be brought into being, when each one of us is in complete revolt inwardly, psychologically, spiritually - then we shall give our hearts, our minds, our bodies towards creating a school where there is no such thing as fear with all its implications. Sir, anything truly revolutionary is created by a few who see what is true and are willing to live according to that truth; but to discover what is true demands freedom from tradition, which means freedom from all fears.

University is not a way to give people jobs. It is a way to prevent people from getting jobs. These universities have a problem now. They were not capable of preventing the poster from getting a job in computing, game platforms and other such enterpreneurial fields, because there is no "Medical association of game programmers" demanding that you first waste a decade of your life. They cannot control the internet and prevent people from leading their own lives as they please. So, now they are frustrated ...

At 22, he must have his B.Tech. Pretending to not have gone ... is this some hipster/ironic brand-building shtick?

Nope.

I don't understand, why must he have his B.Tech at 22? I assume he completed his secondary schooling and just never went on to an undergraduate degree.

Your unwillingness to accept reality doesn't make reality any less real.

Plenty of talented people who have been fortunate enough to have parents that didn't trample their dreams (and potential) have gone one to become successful in their own right without the aid of a degree.

Obviously my humor is wasted on HN.

I apologize if I came off as rude and a bit dense, but it seems you've been on HN long enough to realize, it's a far cry from Reddit (despite frequent mentions to the contrary) and humor is verboten unless it's written in MATLAB.

If I wanted to see idiotic pun threads/snarky irrelevant comments I would go to reddit. I don't want to be rude but I want HN to be a site for serious discussion on mostly technical topics.

lol..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com