|
In Defense of the Ordinary Nathan Engquist Final Essay answering question #6 English 102 In William A. Henry the third’s essay “In Defense of Elitism,” he attempts to convince people that not everyone should go to college after high school. His belief is that the economy must be supported by a majority of working class people for a minority of those who are fortunate enough to get more education. He also asserts that it is a waste of money to educate people with skills they will not use in the workplace. Henry believes that the majority of people who go to college after high school are primarily motivated by the prospect of making more money. He feels that the majority of people who go to college do not go because of their thirst for knowledge. It is not true that all students go to college to increase their income. Henry thinks that how a person performs in school as a youth will determine their future automatically with very few exceptions. What then happens to those who bloom late? Are they to be thrown out from the pool of success that they have the potential to obtain? If Mr. Henry only had further information before reaching such conclusions, he might have reached different conclusions. Not everyone goes to college to make more money. Early into his essay Herny points out that people go to college mostly to make money. I do not think that high school teachers go to college with the intention of making a lot of money. Most people know the risks involved in choosing their major field of study. That is why choosing a major is such a difficult decision. William A. Henry III says, “In the unexamined American Dream rhetoric promoting mass higher education in the nation of my youth, the implicit vision was that one day everyone, or at least practically everyone, would be a manager or a professional” (p. 274). Henry then discusses how it is not possible for everyone to be a manager or professional. He makes a good point that not everyone can be a manger or professional. However not everyone who goes to college majors in these things. Not everyone who goes to college is a Business major, Psychology major, or a Communications and Journalism major as Mr. Henry seems to imply since he only uses these chosen majors as his supporting evidence. Those who choose such fields, do so because they enjoy them, and most of them know the risks involved in getting into fields where the personnel demand is low but there is a large supply of people in the job market with that degree. Therefore these people, who Henry sees a mindless sheep easily swayed by the “American Dream rhetoric”, generally know the risks involved just as a basketball or football player who wishes to go professional knows the risks involved in his/her success. In addition to this idea that everyone goes to school for money, Henry thinks that a person’s future is predetermined at a young age. Human beings are very complex and there are so many variables which determine human behavior that it is impossible to come to such a simple summation and generalization about who will succeed in school and who will not by default. For the sake of those who did not excel as children, it is essential to pay a little extra money. Besides, the federal government spends more money every year on social security than on education. As a percentage, the $150 billion spent on education is not that bad compared with the total amount of money the government gets in taxes. He writes with admiration about how other countries decide who goes to college, “For them, higher education is logically confined to those who displayed the most aptitude for lower education.” This is a ridiculous assertion! In America, the rights of the minority are protected while looking out for the common safety at the same time. Just because most people who tend to score good when they are little will do so forever, does not mean they will not show aptitude at some later point in life. Albert Einstein did not excel in grammar school Mathematics yet his theories in Quantum Mechanics are what he is remembered for because in this country the belief is that it is never too late to excel. If Henry had his way, Einstein would have become a master welder and many current technologies would not exist. Professors teach the subject that they have expertise in. Thus when Henry says, “the curriculum has shifted from being what professors desire to teach to being what students desire to learn. If the students want media-studies programs so they can all fantasize about becoming TV news anchors, then media studies will abound.” I dispute such a claim because the professors who teach such programs majored in these studies so why would they not enjoy teaching them? Henry believes that because there are some 300,000 students enrolled in communications courses per year, that the vast majority will somehow be assumed elite by society once they get their degree. The reality is that many will not be elite anyway so Mr. Henry need not fret about losing his own elitist status. This majority of students who do not become TV news anchors will find other jobs and they will not be elite anyway. They put such illusions in their own heads of the greatness they will achieve as a TV news anchor. The idea of the American Dream simply says that if a person is tenacious enough, then they can achieve great things that couldn’t be achieved anywhere else. Education system reform and a downsizing on higher education is not the solution. A class system exists in a capitalist society and it always will regardless of who goes to college. To date history has shown that in any competitive society, a majority will always support an elitist minority. In feudal Japan their was a caste society and even in the idealistic classless Soviet Union, social classes emerged naturally among the people. The college graduates today have a class system that has already been created within itself based on the economic rules of supply and demand in the market. The higher education system in the United States is not too large percentage wise. There is no downside in having a well informed and educated public other than the small cost which even that helps by fueling the economy. An educated public will question things that are generally accepted by the masses more frequently. Thus an educated public is less likely to mindlessly follow a person like Adolf Hitler. Even though the newly educated public will not achieve wealth in the monetary sense, they will achieve knowledge and thinking skills from college that will help them for life. Education is not the mere summation of creating a useful worker for the economy. For in his own words Henry acknowledges the importance of studying Greek tragedies that are 2000 years old. However in his view it sounds like school is only a tool to make money with so how can studying The Theban Trilogy help a Biochemist synthesize new proteins. My point is that even though Henry argues in his own essay about economics as the driving force and goal of education, he knows that there is more to education than this. Education is a tool that helps give meaning to life and is a source of recreation. In conclusion, money making is not the main motivation behind a college education for all students, only most. It is a rash generalization to believe that the trends of behavior observed in grade school predetermine an individual’s entire social status and future. Education is more valuable than the money people can make from utilizing education because it teaches people how to think for themselves and problem solve, not mere job training. History has taught us that a class system exists regardless from the middle ages where there were serfs and nobles until today when there are middle class and billionaires. Changing the number of people who get college educations will not change the number of people who are elite. William A. Henry III had a lack of knowledge on these topics before writing such an essay.
Return to Nate's Friends and Family Web Site
|