Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The list starts with Abigail Adams and ends with Chuck Yeager.
There are U. S. presidents, Pulitzer and Nobel Prize winners, authors, inventors, mathematicians, and scientists.
One of my favorites on the list is Vivien Thomas, who was one of the pioneers who, with Alfred Blalock, developed surgical procedures for the treatment of cyanotic congenital heart disease. He never got to finish college. He never wrote a thesis. He did teach a generation of cardiac surgeons and was awarded an honorary doctorate by Johns Hopkins University.
Many of those on the list educated themselves in libraries. One common theme in the profiles is a tendency for these people to identify an area of interest and forgo formal university education to pursue that interest.
It is possible to become very well educated without teachers, schoolhouses, or colleges and universities, not to mention defense of a thesis. How many theses end up never being read again after the degree has been awarded? The majority, I suspect.
To me, the best definition of an education is a body of learning that enables you to earn a living and to enjoy your leisure time. The acquisition of that body of learning can be through a formal degree program, on your own, or on the job --- or a combination of sources. Even those with advanced degrees, such as physicians, must continue to add to their fund of knowledge, incorporating what they read and learn from mentors and colleagues.
So yes, you can be very well educated on a subject without attending graduate school or writing and defending a thesis.
You cherry picked my post and then ignored my point entirely. The only reason graduate school is needed is because it is the best (note not ONLY) way for most people to go through "discourse and direct challenge" on the subject they are studying.
I never said it was the ONLY way for that to occur and this is evident in your choice of Vivien Thomas as an example. He worked with a man in a typical advisor/mentoree relationship where there was exchange of ideas including challenge and defense.
As for many of the other people, historians and scientists, frequently went through the discourse and challenge through correspondence with other experts in their field.
I don't know how you would define educated or uneducated, but I think there are certain characteristics that educated people have that uneducated people don't - and thus that is why they are uneducated. It doesn't have to be a formal education, but if you have a thirst for knowledge you are naturally curious and seek out answers. You read. You ask questions. You look beyond the surface. I think educated people think about concepts and ideas and abstract things/things other than what is right in front of them.
Here goes my stereotype of an uneducated person: Doesn't think about anything more than their own personal experience in life. As long as they have cigarettes and beer and a TV, they are happy. Wouldn't bother to read anything because they don't care about anything beyond themselves or want to learn about anything - not history, and not philosphical thinking. They wouldn't gaze at the stars and think deep thoughts. They have no deep thoughts! They may be intelligent, but they don't bother with abstract thinking because they don't care about anything unless it affects their own comfort - i.e., hedonistic.
I have heard people say this is also the difference between an "old soul" and a "young soul."
No, they just may no be well educated. Graduate school is unique. It is as unlike college as college is unlike high school. It is almost impossible to be well educated in an area without the discourse and direct challenge offered by graduate work.You can read every book on a subject and it cannot begin to compare with the inherent mastery you need to go through defense of a thesis. Now that does not mean every person with a graduate degree is well educated, just that it is very hard to be well educated in an subject without going through that process
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
You cherry picked my post and then ignored my point entirely. The only reason graduate school is needed is because it is the best(note not ONLY) way for most people to go through "discourse and direct challenge" on the subject they are studying.
I never said it was the ONLY way for that to occur and this is evident in your choice of Vivien Thomas as an example. He worked with a man in a typical advisor/mentoree relationship where there was exchange of ideas including challenge and defense.
As for many of the other people, historians and scientists, frequently went through the discourse and challenge through correspondence with other experts in their field.
Perhaps you did not mean what you said? I understood you to mean that the best education requires graduate school in a program that demands writing and defending a thesis. I take it that is now not what you meant?
There are many graduate programs that do not involve writing a thesis. The lack of a thesis does not mean that those programs are necessarily less rigorous.
I have a sister-in-law who is an attorney. She was one of the last people allowed to take the New York State Bar exam without going to law school at all. She studied law in her father's law office. Do I consider her well-educated? Yes. No graduate school at all.
By the way, the relationship between Thomas and Blalock was anything but typical. Had Thomas been white, not African-American, we would now refer to the Blalock-Taussig procedure as the Thomas-Blalock-Taussig procedure.
For those who are interested, more about Vivien Thomas, an educated man:
Perhaps you did not mean what you said? I understood you to mean that the best education requires graduate school in a program that demands writing and defending a thesis. I take it that is now not what you meant?
I will post it again, maybe you will read it this time.
"It is almost impossible to be well educated in an area without the discourse and direct challenge offered by graduate work. "
I did not say it is impossible, just nearly so. And that is especially true in this day and age. Almost everyone you posted are historical figures.
Quote:
There are many graduate programs that do not involve writing a thesis. The lack of a thesis does not mean that those programs are necessarily less rigorous.
Says you. It is well known in the sciences that any graduate capstone is much easier than writing and defending a thesis.
Quote:
I have a sister-in-law who is an attorney. She was one of the last people allowed to take the New York State Bar exam without going to law school at all. She studied law in her father's law office. Do I consider her well-educated? Yes. No graduate school at all.
Wow. ONE PERSON. Why do you think they made law school a requirement if it isn't beneficial to the majority of people studying law?
Quote:
By the way, the relationship between Thomas and Blalock was anything but typical. Had Thomas been white, not African-American, we would now refer to the Blalock-Taussig procedure as the Thomas-Blalock-Taussig procedure.
Again, says you. Their adversarial AND collegial relationship was found among many scientists who were mentors, colleagues and rivals all at the same time. And, while race was certainly the reason Thomas was not in a traditional university setting, the idea of the mentor taking credit for the mentorees work is nothing new. Einstein was fully expected to take credit (or at least first author status) for the Bose-einstein condensate/stats papers. Its to his credit that he didn't.
And while everyone knows Thomas because he has a movie about him, there are lots of other examples of similar circumstances.
I don't think a piece of paper(degree) is all that matters. Unfortunately we as a society believe college is so important. Don't get me wrong its important to an extent but you can be successful without it. I think paying for college is a scam but that's a whole other story lol.
I will post it again, maybe you will read it this time.
"It is almost impossible to be well educated in an area without the discourse and direct challenge offered by graduate work. "
I did not say it is impossible, just nearly so. And that is especially true in this day and age. Almost everyone you posted are historical figures.
"Well educated in an area" is not the same as being "well educated". Someone who writes and defends a thesis may know more than anyone else in the world about his thesis topic. That does not guarantee that he has a well rounded education.
The list is a list of famous autodidacts, not every autodidact in the world.
Yes, the explosion of knowledge makes it difficult for one person to become a master of a wide range of fields. That still does not mean the best way to become well educated is of necessity to go to graduate school.
Says you. It is well known in the sciences that any graduate capstone is much easier than writing and defending a thesis.
Are you aware that few medical schools require a traditional thesis? That certification in a specialty does not require a thesis? It does usually mean passing a stiff oral examination that can include topics from the entire field for which certification is sought. Do you really think that is easier than defending a thesis on one narrow topic?
Quote:
Wow. ONE PERSON. Why do you think they made law school a requirement if it isn't beneficial to the majority of people studying law?
I did not say the only one, did I?
Currently, one year of law school is required to take the New York State Bar exam. Few people go that route, and it is difficult for them to pass the exam. But some do it.
Quote:
Again, says you. Their adversarial AND collegial relationship was found among many scientists who were mentors, colleagues and rivals all at the same time. And, while race was certainly the reason Thomas was not in a traditional university setting, the idea of the mentor taking credit for the mentorees work is nothing new. Einstein was fully expected to take credit (or at least first author status) for the Bose-einstein condensate/stats papers. Its to his credit that he didn't.
And while everyone knows Thomas because he has a movie about him, there are lots of other examples of similar circumstances.
Care to elaborate on those examples?
I used Thomas because he was a self educated man in a scientific setting. He never went to college, much less to graduate school, or wrote a thesis. The "many scientists who were mentors, colleagues, and rivals all at the same time" tended to have similar educational backgrounds that involved formal training and degrees.
Although writing and defending a thesis can be a challenging exercise, it does not automatically make one better educated than a person who does not do so. It just means you were able to research and write about a single topic.
Edited to add: while no one today can learn everything about everything, technology makes it easier to learn something about anything. Just Google it! You can even watch college lectures online for free, even Harvard:
"Well educated in an area" is not the same as being "well educated". Someone who writes and defends a thesis may know more than anyone else in the world about his thesis topic. That does not guarantee that he has a well rounded education.
Ok, well than based on your definition Thomas is not well educated.
Quote:
The list is a list of famous autodidacts, not every autodidact in the world.
Yes, the explosion of knowledge makes it difficult for one person to become a master of a wide range of fields. That still does not mean the best way to become well educated is of necessity to go to graduate school.
Well, actually since I stated that well educated in a subject area, than yes, it is the best way to become well educated.
Quote:
Are you aware that few medical schools require a traditional thesis? That certification in a specialty does not require a thesis? It does usually mean passing a stiff oral examination that can include topics from the entire field for which certification is sought. Do you really think that is easier than defending a thesis on one narrow topic?
Have you completed a research based thesis that included defense? Have you gone to medical school?
If you have done both, hell even either, we can have a debate based on your personal opinion.
As for medical school, students are called to defend their diagnoses, their opinions on treatment, etc on a daily basis. The process of DEFENSE is the challenge and discourse that occurs in graduate school (even law school and they usually use socratic method) that does not occur when reading a book. So yes, doctors, lawyers, thesis candidates etc all have to go through this process. A library card alone cannot give that.
Quote:
I did not say the only one, did I?
Sucks when people twist what you say doesn't it? Stop doing it to me and I will not do it to you.
Quote:
Currently, one year of law school is required to take the New York State Bar exam. Few people go that route, and it is difficult for them to pass the exam. But some do it.
LOL
So because a smaller fraction of people can do something that is incredibly difficult that means that going to law school is not the BEST way to become a well educated lawyer? OK.
Quote:
Care to elaborate on those examples?
So Bose and Einstein wasn't an example?
Darwin, Lyell and Wallace.
Dewar and Onnes
Lavosier, Berthollet, et al.
Mendel and Nageli
Do I have to have more? These people through letters exchanged ideas, fought, challenged, collaborated, defended, etc outside the university setting. It can be done. It involves more than a library card and it is very similar to the relationship that Thomas and Baloock had in its blend of collegiality and challenge, if not its racial overtones.
Quote:
I used Thomas because he was a self educated man in a scientific setting. He never went to college, much less to graduate school, or wrote a thesis. The "many scientists who were mentors, colleagues, and rivals all at the same time" tended to have similar educational backgrounds that involved formal training and degrees.
He never went to college because people in his situation COULDNT. Once more, it isn't writing the thesis it is the challenge, discourse, and DEFENSE that matters. I understand you have no idea what I am talking about that does not make it acceptable to just ignore the words.
Quote:
Although writing and defending a thesis can be a challenging exercise, it does not automatically make one better educated than a person who does not do so. It just means you were able to research and write about a single topic.
Says you. Have you defended a thesis? If so, in what setting?
Defending a thesis means you have gone through (or at least should have in a quality program) learned to think critically by asserting ones ideas, having them challenged, successfully defend those challenges, and then, doing the same for others. A library card cannot give that. If all one does is read, who is going to challenge those ideas? Who can you engage in discourse? Who will make you defend your own ideas?
If you have no done that, than you are not well educated in that area.
Quote:
Edited to add: while no one today can learn everything about everything, technology makes it easier to learn something about anything. Just Google it! You can even watch college lectures online for free, even Harvard:
No grade pressure, no required courses, no tuition, just the freedom to choose what you would like to study.
Fine, we have established that you think being well educated is knowing a bit about everything and nothing in depth, because depth is the difference between well educated and educated . I think being well educated means having those critical thinking skills that can only be gained by going through the challenge and defense process.
And not for nothing, I have the education I want and am well beyond the gen ed courses 100 level courses they offer. Not sure why you think I should be taking Gen Chem I and II again but it is a nice way to become EDUCATED, but then we were talking about WELL EDUCATED.
I've being called "uneducated" infact for not going to university , mind you the person who uttered those words was a teenager and i as an adult , i being in my 20's laughed it off , i wouldnt want to reply to uneducated statement , as far as im concerned everyone is educated except for those who are inconsiderate of other peoples feelings , but those who work are very much looked upon as if they are "uneducated" i work but never been to uni , it doesnt make me uneducated , it just makes me a person whose never been to uni , but is fairly educated , not everyone knows everything , people just need to understand and be considerate of other peoples struggles and feelings in life, therefore emitting such words as " uneducated", Since it is one of the worst and most degrading insult
I don't know how you would define educated or uneducated, but I think there are certain characteristics that educated people have that uneducated people don't - and thus that is why they are uneducated. It doesn't have to be a formal education, but if you have a thirst for knowledge you are naturally curious and seek out answers. You read. You ask questions. You look beyond the surface. I think educated people think about concepts and ideas and abstract things/things other than what is right in front of them.
Here goes my stereotype of an uneducated person: Doesn't think about anything more than their own personal experience in life. As long as they have cigarettes and beer and a TV, they are happy. Wouldn't bother to read anything because they don't care about anything beyond themselves or want to learn about anything - not history, and not philosphical thinking. They wouldn't gaze at the stars and think deep thoughts. They have no deep thoughts! They may be intelligent, but they don't bother with abstract thinking because they don't care about anything unless it affects their own comfort - i.e., hedonistic.
I have heard people say this is also the difference between an "old soul" and a "young soul."
This. "Doesn't think about anything more than their own personal experience of life." And, generalizes that view to include all of life. Funny how some minds work.
I'd say the college degree(s) by themselves don't make one educated as much as the desire to attain the degrees make one as such. Even in high school, the college bound kids were obviously much different than the others. Agree?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Attitude vs the Degree
