sure. Then do you also agree that if you need to spend 4 years learning how to write effective software you probably shouldn't go to university either?
Your basic point is that education is worthless. What do you propose as a substitute? And please explain also why it is better at the scale of a society?
Given your view on the ease of effective writing, it is fair to expect that your answer is well structured at the level of the entire essay, the paragraph, and the sentence. Your reply should also include appropriate historical references demonstrating your points.
If you cannot meet that standard, then by your own argument you have proved yourself wrong.
> Then do you also agree that if you need to spend 4 years learning how to write effective software you probably shouldn't go to university either?
The scope of writing for effective communication and writing software are very different, but I do also agree with this. SE and CS degrees aren't for writing software though.
I think specialized education has far fewer benefits than most people think. Basic language and mathematical skills are a good baseline, but expecting to teach the whole population advanced algebra for instance, does not seem productive. It's why people question what they were taught in school.
> If you cannot meet that standard, then by your own argument you have proved yourself wrong
Funny you say that, since I have always had good English without trying and my communication skills have been commented on by a number of different people I've worked with so my perspective on this is somewhat biased.
> my communication skills have been commented on by a number of different people I've worked with so my perspective on this is somewhat biased.
I want to first give you full credit for an honest and thoughtful debate, in the true spirit of HN. You have my respect.
Second, I fully believe that you have exceptional talent in communication.
That bias, however, is the issue. You do it naturally. You also point out that this is exceptional. What do we do with the 90% of the population who are not exceptionally gifted? Maybe they would benefit from a structured approach which trains them on the skills which come to you naturally?
Same for many other things. The best programmers I've known all were really good without the Uni education. And the structured education of a good masters program brought them to a new level.
Danger! sports analogy. You can't play in the majors without a great deal of natural talent. But the people with talent ANSD specialized training ("intentional practice", "good coaching", or however else you want to phrase "education") are going to dominate.
> It's why people question what they were taught in school.
Respectfully, there has also been a multi-decade large scale concerted attack by big business and the US Republican party with the explicit aim of getting people to question education and teachers.
And please make the distinction between what was taught and what was learned. If you go back and look at what the teachers had on the curriculum you might be surprised.
