I think Scott Adams is a fantastic writer. I frequently enjoy reading his blog. If you have not yet had the chance you should read the piece he penned for the Wall Street Journal on education. Adams is certainly creative in this piece but his perspective seems to be limited to economics. Even my technology oriented college required courses in the humanities. Although some students dismissed these as joke classes, others embraced them and were able to explore parts of their interests they otherwise would not pursue. Adams also failed to consider the impact on society if we only specialize in the things we are interested in. Citizens will never be fully informed on all the issues, but should at least be literate in them and able to identify and articulate why their preferred candidates comport with those values. Otherwise if a large group of voters are “getting it wrong” then society might lose out on a good leader that actually shares the values of its citizens.
I understand why the top students in America study physics, chemistry, calculus and classic literature. The kids in this brainy group are the future professors, scientists, thinkers and engineers who will propel civilization forward. But why do we make B students sit through these same classes? That's like trying to train your cat to do your taxesâ€”a waste of time and money. Wouldn't it make more sense to teach B students something useful, like entrepreneurship?