THBT: On balance, getting a STEM degree is more useful to society than getting a Liberal Arts degree
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 6,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- 1,550
RULES:
The framework below, including definitions, is agreed on by both debaters as part of the decision to participate in this debate.
BURDEN OF PROOF:
BoP is shared. Pro argues that getting a STEM degree is more useful to society than getting a Liberal Arts degree. Con argues that getting a Liberal Arts degree is more useful to society than getting a STEM degree. Essentially, the purpose of this debate is to answer the question: Which degree is more useful in the hands of someone who wants to help society?
DEFINITIONS:
Society: Those we choose to help or interact with
Useful: Offering some measure of utility
- Computers
- Mobile Phones (and Smartphones)
- Internet
- Flash Drives
- LED Light Bulbs
- MP3 Players
- Digital Cameras
- Source
- Antibiotics
- Vaccines for polio, measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox
- Blood Storage
- MRIs
- HIV Therapy
- The Human Genome Project
- Source
- Psychology is of critical importance in profiling serial criminals and proactively stopping murders before they happen. The best cure is prevention.
- Marginal benefit - What is the incremental benefit to society available from one new degree of this kind?
- Net impact - What kinds of major advances have been accomplished by people with each type of degree when their skills are combined?
- As I pointed out already, on balance, the salary from STEM is much greater than the salary from Liberal Arts.
- The marginal benefit here is questionable. How many PR people are actually The technology developed by someone with a STEM major is unquestionably more important than the reputation of any one particular company.
- Con also assumes that PR is a net benefit, when it is often harmful. The companies with the best products should rise to the top, not those with the slickest advertisers.
- Theranos had great PR but horrible technology, consisting mostly of graphic designers instead of medical experts. Elizabeth Holmes focused on PR instead of finishing her STEM degree, and as a result, Theranos endangered hundreds of thousands of consumers.
- No, it won’t. AI can already make better artwork than most humans.
- I also think that medical advances and technological developments that dramatically alleviate poverty are generally more of a benefit to humanity than artwork that looks cool.
- And finally, who developed the computers that these graphic designers are relying on?
- You can learn a language better by simply living in that country or practicing than by getting a Liberal Arts degree.
- I’d also rather be treated by a doctor who only speaks one language than a language translator with no experience in medicine—different doctors speak different languages, we don’t need one doctor speaking five of them.
- Few Liberal Arts majors will rise to this level of importance
- It’s doubtful that a Liberal Arts degree actually helps much in these kinds of situations. Some people are simply more charismatic than others.
- We only need a dozen or so diplomats—the supply vastly outweighs the demand. It’s also doubtful that the best people get selected for the job, since political elections rely heavily on luck.
- It’s often hard to predict the interests of a country, or even to predict whether those interests align with those that are beneficial to society. Hillary Clinton majored in political science and then voted for the Iraq War, which turned out to be a huge blunder.
- Foreign policy isn’t going to change much whether the country has 10,000 Liberal Arts Majors or 10,000,000.
- Meanwhile, a scientist helping to develop new kinds of medicine has a stronger guarantee that their research will actually help people.
- I’ll admit there’s a positive influence on society here, but not one comparable to STEM degrees.
- Pediatricians are more likely to save lives than social workers.
- Child mortality has dramatically been reduced, largely thanks to advancements in medical care, which rely on STEM.
- Autism was initially discovered by psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler, and most researchers developing new treatments for autism are psychiatrists as well.
- Becoming a psychiatrist requires a very STEM-heavy course load, and most psychiatrists major in a STEM major out of convenience. Psychiatry is STEM, not Liberal Arts.
- This is largely a zero-sum game, since lawyers specialize in arguing with other lawyers. Double the amount of lawyers in society, and very little will change.
- Most public resources are directed toward prosecutors, but most defendants are guilty. So it’s not clear whether a lawyer should become a prosecutor or a defense lawyer, or if either of those are more beneficial to society.
- Becoming a lawyer is very difficult and requires extra years of schooling. A CS major, for example, has a better guarantee of making a similar salary which can be donated to the same causes.
- I don’t think that more career officers = better results. Most schools that are interested in having career counselors can easily get one.
- A career counselor or correctional office is also a very small fraction of the influence that someone has, only meeting with them for small periods and often just to check in. Parents/friends/acquaintances are largely going to determine the positive influences someone has and there won’t be much room for the Liberal Arts major to make a huge difference.
- Teaching is a career that can only be obtained with a LA degree.
- Not all STEM jobs pay that much.
- The marginal benefit of STEM degrees is greater than the marginal benefit of Liberal Arts degrees.
- STEM majors deal with more important issues than Liberal Arts majors—disease, development of new technology, engineering. Their accomplishments are far more impressive combined than the accomplishments of Liberal Arts majors.
- The description clarifies the question before us: Which degree is more useful in the hands of someone who wants to help society? Some Liberal Arts degrees will be more useful than others, but almost all STEM degrees will be more useful, allowing for more charitable donations that save lives and more impact of technological development.
- Becoming a computer science instructor requires a STEM degree, not a Liberal Arts degree
- We do need some amount of high school teachers, but there are only so many schools and so many students. If there was more demand for teachers, salaries would reflect that. Most problems with the school system have to do with bad policy, not the number of teachers.
- The quality of education at the high school level is not going to matter as much as the information learned at college. There’s a lot of demand for knowledgable CS professors, since Computer Science is one of the most popular majors.
- On balance, STEM degrees pay more than Liberal Arts.
- The good thing about STEM is that the potential is unlimited. Whereas Liberal Art majors can only teach so many students and defend so many clients, STEM majors can invent infinite numbers of new products for which there will always be demand.
- By the time every possible technological advancement has been created, we won’t need Liberal Arts majors anymore—AI will be doing everything for us.
- Salaries reflect this—there’s simply much more demand for STEM, and top companies are begging for more talent.
- No, that’s the major risk of Liberal Arts degrees, statistically speaking.
- Has it, though? The BLM protests caused over $1 billion in property damage. Universities have mainly stood behind BLM, which has likely stolen $10 million in charity fraud.
- Whatever universities are teaching with regards to activism and better race relations clearly isn’t working. They’re simply throwing their support behind an organization that has increased racial tensions.
- Let’s not forget that many universities openly discriminate in admissions. Are classes on race taught by these universities going to help race relations or harm them?
- Being lectured on institutional racism by an openly racist institution does not provide a tangible benefit. Developing new technology helps everyone.
- It talks about solving those problems, but STEM actually addresses them, since a good way to end a cycle of poverty is to get a high-paying STEM job to support your family, or to donate.
- Let’s not forget that most of the efforts to address these systemic problems by activist groups have caused huge crime spikes.
- You know who actually analyzes the factors that reduce crime, which disproportionately affects minority groups? Statisticians.
- Both of those are STEM subjects.
- Regardless of what Liberal Arts has done in the past (and it hasn’t done much), it’s clear that increased research into these subjects in the future will require STEM degrees.
- And yet plenty of successful people have STEM degrees without also requiring a Liberal Arts degree.
- Most people learn language at a young age by just talking to people. A college degree isn’t required to understand basic language.
- High school education helps somewhat with language, but as I already pointed out, there’s not as much demand for more teachers as there is for more STEM majors.
- Even if a STEM major is bad at grammar or writing an essay, this doesn’t change whether they can code.
- Yes, astronomy requires a STEM degree.
- It seems that Con has simply given a list of Liberal Arts degrees and named the problems they are supposed to solve, without showing how effective those degrees are or comparing them to the benefits of STEM degrees.
- Con has provided a total of two sources, both of which are simply definitions of a number of Liberal Arts jobs, and neither of which actually give a measure of how helpful they are to society.
- Voting policy holds that source points should be given “to the side that (with a strong quality lead) better supported their case with relevant outside evidence and/or analysis thereof.”
- Con may provide all sorts of new arguments and evidence that I will then be unable to respond to, but voters should dismiss them.
- An understanding of basic syntax, grammar, language, and structure is needed to write code.
- Someone who is illiterate cannot write code.
- By exploring history and biology, LA has contributed in bringing racial awareness and brought a deeper of understanding of microscopic organisms to further advance medical science.
- Liberal ARTs degrees have also contributed to a deeper understanding of the environment, so STEM can develop technology to address climate change and Global Warming.
bump
Thanks for voting!
I hope I wasn't too brutal with my Reason for Vote :O
Thx for the vote!
Nice debate
Please vote if you can!