End the University as We Know It

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/opinion/27taylor.html

by mjfern • 17 years ago

39 26 17 years ago

gaius3• 17 years ago

A Water program would bring together people in the humanities, arts, social and natural sciences with representatives from professional schools like medicine, law, business, engineering, social work, theology and architecture. Through the intersection of multiple perspectives and approaches, new theoretical insights will develop and unexpected practical solutions will emerge.

Interesting list. Unfortunately for the author, the people who will actually solve the problem - the engineers - already have their act together and aren't particularly interested in what sociologists and theologians have to say about desalination plants...

Tommy_Mancino• 17 years ago

You miss the point exactly. Solving the water problem is not just an engineering issue, but a geo-political issue as well.

ajkirwin• 17 years ago

No, really, it's not. It's an engineering issue.

Tangurena2• 17 years ago

I think we'll see more and more legal frameworks such as the Great Lakes Compact where the export of water from the region is illegal. Our water-rights laws in the US are totally messed up. For example, in CO (where I live) and UT, it is illegal for you to collect the rainwater that falls on your roof: it belongs to someone else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lakes_Compact

Solving the upcoming water problems is a wholly political problem and not one of engineering.

http://anthropik.com/2006/08/israels-water-wars/

biohacker42• 17 years ago

Solving the upcoming water problems is a wholly political problem

Agreed, but effective politics is a rigorous Machiavellian exercise. Perhaps political science majors would be useful, but again, theology and what not brings nothing to the table.

nir• 17 years ago

>Solving the upcoming water problems is a wholly political problem and not one of engineering

I'm not sure I understand this. Maybe in the sense that if there was peace among nations it would easier to apply the engineering solutions that would solve the water problem?

Even so, directing more resources to water engineering research can be reasonably expected to result in some useful solutions. Few will claim that strengthening political science depts would yield more world peace.

(BTW, the 2nd article contains Reddit-level nonsense. That it is published by academics - I assume? - says more about academia than its subject matter)

philwelch• 17 years ago

Part of the division into departments is a good thing because it reflects a separation of concerns. A philosophical question (what is our ethical duty as human beings, which methods of argument and reasoning provide valid conclusions under which sets of assumptions, what conceptions of free will are compatible with metaphysical determinism) can't be meaningfully answered from a scientific or artistic approach though scientists and artists are both capable of philosophy to some extent, and in fact it would be good to see academics publishing across related fields more often. I could easily imagine epistemologists, philosophers of science, and scientists productively publishing together in methodology-of-science journals and attending methodology conferences.

Furthermore, departments allow for a deliberate separation of fundamentally incompatible approaches. Some people who take up the dubious academic pursuit of seeing everything from the perspective of feminism or race go to the Women's Studies and Ethnic Studies departments, and the rest of us are often better off without them. If we tried to close or ban the Women's Studies or Ethnic Studies department, people would be taking that crap back into other fields, so as a political compromise we have those departments as a containment field (though I am speaking too harshly, there are certainly benefits for the academics in those fields as well).

Ardit20• 17 years ago

I haven't read the article, but regarding your comment you are treating the departments as if they are completely isolated. I do psychology and it contains many sub-fields such as political psychology, social psychology, biological psychology which basically can be considered as inter-disciplinary fields, bringing these departments together.

I am sure many other subjects have such inter-disciplinary field, sure maths may not go with psychology (although psychologists do need to do statistics) but it goes quite well with physics, chemistry with biology etc. so these departments are not islands on their own isolated from the other fields, each field has much to contribute to other fields.

kgrin• 17 years ago

To expand on the second point a bit more: one of the virtues of the department model is that (most) departments teach a particular way of approaching problems, a "discipline" if you will. They teach you to "think like a [computer scientist|chemist|psychologist|etc]".

Certainly, there's often a great deal of value in breaking down these disciplinary barriers and attacking the problem holistically - which is why many institutions have interdisciplinary programs and the like. But there's also a value in fields of study retaining some identity as disciplines, with particular methodologies, mores and so forth.

csbartus• 17 years ago

The knowledge is not for free. But you cannot buy it with money, as the university model is stating, but with time, the learning time.

Anyway time is money

jokull• 17 years ago

School sucks!

dinkumthinkum3• 17 years ago

Hm ... A religion professor feels like current university system is useless and antiquated... Perhaps it is really his own field that is useless and antiquated.

michael_dorfman• 17 years ago

You should check out his writings-- I doubt he's the kind of "religion professor" you suspect he is.

For example: http://www.amazon.com/After-Religion-Postmodernism-Mark-Tayl... http://www.amazon.com/Erring-Postmodern-theology-Mark-Taylor... http://www.amazon.com/About-Religion-Economies-Virtual-Postm...

dinkumthinkum3• 17 years ago

Well, actually know he's exactly the kind I suspected. I'm as nonplussed by his work as I am by Rorty. Nevertheless, I stand by my assertion. If I want to read about deconstruction I'll read someone who knows something about it like Derrida. This argument for things like a Water department is pretty lackluster at best.

nertzy• 17 years ago

Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering in Needham, Mass. (alma mater of a handful of YC team members) has taken several of these ideas to heart.

http://www.olin.edu

No tenure, collaboration with nearby institutions to share courses, encouragement for all community members to contribute to developing and changing all aspects of the college at any time, and no separated academic departments. The list goes on and on.

It's a great place for entrepreneurially-minded students to find an atmosphere that allows them to build up their skills without having to settle for university-level bureaucracy.

krschultz3• 17 years ago

I was admitted but at the time it was very new, I really wish I had went

alexgartrell• 17 years ago

What about CS grad school? Don't research labs take the pressure off of PHD candidates to find tenured positions?

(Disclaimer: This is an actual question, not 'fightin words')

dinkumthinkum3• 17 years ago

Actually, the pressure is pretty high for CS PhD students. It is a very competitive field. Nevertheless, in terms of "actually finding a job" the prospects are pretty good for CS PhDs ... I've never heard of any having problems. Honestly, I don't know any masters students having issues with this.

End the University as We Know It

Related Stories