Should taxpayer dollars subsidize the liberal arts?

Liberal arts are fields of study that emphasize reading, writing, and argument, rather than technology.

One side says:
(Flip all cards) (Flip all cards)

  • Liberals arts are a bad return on investment (ROI)

    Majoring in anthropology or English doesn't prepare you for the jobs that need to be filled. This is bad for students, bad for the taxpayers, and bad for the economy.

  • The liberal arts are a selfish pursuit.

    Studying ancient Greek or English is not very useful to our economy or society. Self-improvement is nice, but it shouldn't happen on the taxpayer's dime.

  • The liberal arts made sense a hundred years ago, not today.

    They were designed to prepare you for a world that no longer exists. One in which you needed impress your peers with your mastery of philosophy or ancient Greek.

  • President Obama Speaks on Training Workers for In-Demand Jobs, by The White House
  • Science and the Humanities: Still "Two Cultures"? by FORA.tv
  • Is College a Waste of Money? by Fox News

The other side says:
(Flip all cards) (Flip all cards)

  • The liberal arts are the most efficient way of making people smarter.

    Thinking outside the box, questioning assumptions, making a good argument – these are the most important skills we can teach. They're critical to success, to leadership, and to citizenship.

  • The liberal arts prepare you for the 21st century workplace and life.

    Entrepreneurs need liberal arts skills. Dealing with a quickly-changing world requires outside-the-box thinking more than narrow technical training. This is why Silicon Valley actively recruits liberal arts majors.

  • The liberal arts are about the pursuit of truth for its own sake.

    Are we really ready to convert our institutions of higher learning into trade schools?

  • Steve Jobs: Technology & Liberal Arts, by Dana Peters
  • Why a Liberal Arts Education in a Democracy? by National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS)