SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Australia's conservative government announced plans Friday to double university fees for humanities students, in a bid to push people into more useful, "job-relevant" courses like maths and science.
Under the proposal—which critics panned as an "ideological assault"—the cost of degrees like history or cultural studies will rise up to 113 percent to around US$29,000, while other courses such as nursing and information technology will become cheaper.
Education Minister Dan Tehan—an arts graduate with two advanced degrees in international relations—said the government wanted to corral young people towards "jobs of the future" to boost the country's economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.
"If you are wanting to do philosophy, which will be great for your critical thinking, also think about doing IT," Tehan said.
The plan would help pay for an additional 39,000 university places by 2023 and for cost cuts for courses like science, agriculture, maths and languages.
[...] "I'm an arts graduate and so is the minister for education so I'm not sure you can draw the conclusion that we're completely unemployable," said opposition lawmaker Tanya Plibersek.
(Score: 1) by Zinnia Zirconium on Monday June 22 2020, @03:41AM (4 children)
Hehehe, agenda. I don't have an agenda. But I sure know how technology can be a deep dark rabbit hole full of rabid rabbits and hopeless disillusionment that creative philosopher poets might could want to avoid if they don't want to become ever so cynical.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday June 22 2020, @03:52AM
Nothing wrong of being cynical, especially since cynicism != nihilism and neither immoral.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Monday June 22 2020, @03:56AM
nothing wrong with cynicism.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday June 22 2020, @04:02AM (1 child)
You can lead a philosopher to IT, but you cannot make him fail to recognize the insipid nature of a technology with no porpoise. We have people doing all those very nice frequency charts of terms, as if they meant something. We have studies of "likes" and the Argumentum ad Populam, forgetting that it is a fallacy, or incorrect reasoning. See the APA, Philosophy Bakes Bread [apaonline.org].
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 22 2020, @07:24AM
We can add a porpoise to IT, as long as it's only one porpoise for all philosophers and the philosophers promise not to hurt it.
It would also be easier to add more forks on the table, but then IT would be a lot more insipid · [wikipedia.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford