On Head Knowledge and College

As a gamer, I have often had opportunity to speak with people who I might have otherwise never met. In particular, I know quite a few people from countries across the Atlantic. From these, I've gained a different perspective (albeit, in a limited fashion) of the thoughts and feelings from those in Europe.

Much as President Obama touts here, many of my EU friends love the universal university education provided by their countries. For many, it is seen as a right (or close to one). To them, higher education is virtually guaranteed to afford better opportunities, something which is statistically true. These conversations, at some point, tend to lead to a little America-bashing, where we are mocked for the perception that we are ignorant.

Several months ago, it occurred to me just how arrogant this mentality is (ironically, arrogance is the very thing many Europeans will accuse Americans of). While it is true there are many ignorant people in the United States, why would this not hold true of Europe as well? The only reason it is obvious in America is that we, as a nation, attract more attention.

However, it also begs the following question: what exactly is intelligence? I have addressed this before, however, today I talk more about “head knowledge.” This is the information you learn in school and in universities. Physics, history, literature; the subjects university students plan to use to make careers for themselves.

Of course, head knowledge varies from individual to individual. Often, people are mocked for not knowing simple information, such as locating France on an unmarked map or identifying the man on the ten dollar bill.

But is this indicative of stupidity? Or is it, as I believe, indicative of differing priorities?

After all, how is it bad or a waste of a good mind if the plumber who is fixing my sink can not find France on a map? Who would want to? It's France.

French-bashing aside, why would it matter to the plumber? He is there to fix my sink, not teach me the map of the world. If he's making $100,000 yearly by being a practical, useful human being, why would knowing where France is help him in his job? It wouldn't. Why would the man seeking to do well so he can feed a family sit down and figure out that Alexander Hamilton graces the bills I paid him for a job well done?

Ultimately, I believe that it boils down to the conceit caused by universal college. That conceit is two-fold.

First, in propping up universities and universities alone, people place undue importance on higher education over other career paths. People who go to college often grow arrogant, feeling that they are, in some way, superior to people who have not. Many of those people are blissfully unaware of their ignorance. That is not to say there is no need a need for scientists, historians and linguists, but these fields also do not teach much in the way of practical skills which one could use in a normal job.

Additionally, it implies that other careers and jobs are somehow not fulfilling. Not that it is glamorous to pick up trash, but it's also a job that needs doing, regardless of one's level of education. And I'm sure there are some who get a sense of fulfillment out of the dirty, gritty jobs that academics would never do.

The other problem lies in the fact that “college for everyone” assumes that everyone is cut out for college. Being a university student requires a certain type of person. One who hungers and thirsts for knowledge is a must. It requires a focused mind as book-learning can become quite tedious. To assume that everyone can do this sort of thing is silly, not because some people are inherently superior to others, but because people are different. Some people absorb knowledge early, while others take time. Some have the patience to read large textbooks while others do not. Some have the ability to memorize maps of the world and do complex algebra in their heads while others cannot. It's not necessarily because some are stupid and lazy while others are smart and quick; our brains are just wired differently to do different things.

This sort of thinking also trivializes other kinds of knowledge and intelligence. Why does one need to attend university when he or she is perfectly capable of starting a business without the education? Learning the nuances, struggling to turn a profit and make payroll, and succeeding or failing on one's own merits is learning as well and no less useful than understanding the ins and outs of the American Civil War. Both have their place and both aid those who know them.

I say none of this to suggest we should discourage people from attending university. What I am saying is that it is okay to attend university, just as it is okay to attend a trade school, join a company and work your way through the ranks or start your own business. All are noble pursuits worthy of respect.

People will learn information as they need it.  They don't learn based on some arbitrary assumption of information's necessity, but because it will be useful to them in their jobs or their lives.  And college is but one place where one can seek out knowledge.

Europe, in all of its glorious, fully labeled splendor!  I, once again, apologize to the Poles.