QA問答：與亞洲相比，美國大學生傾向於獲得更沒有價值的社會正義類學位？_風聞

【來源龍騰網】

Why does it seem like American college goers have a proclivity to go towards more worthless social justice type degrees compared to college students in Asia? Is it because America is already rich and they can afford it, but Asians need to make money?

為什麼與亞洲的大學生相比，美國的大學生似乎更傾向於獲得更沒有價值的社會正義類學位？是因為美國已經很富有了，他們負擔得起，但亞洲人需要賺錢嗎？

原創評論翻譯：

Brandon Ross

Is it because America is already rich and they can afford it.

Oh no. Absolutely not.

Quite a lot of the student who sext these “worthless social justice” degrees:

are not rich

will never be rich

and, by virtue of choosing their degree, will be in significant debt for much of their adult life.

“是因為美國已經很富有了，他們負擔得起嗎？”

哦，不。絕對不是。

很多選擇這些“毫無價值的社會正義”學位的學生：

1、並不富裕

2、永遠不會富有

3、而且，由於選擇了這個學位，他們成年後的大部分時間都將負債累累。

But no one stops them from doing so. Instead, we encourage it. In the U.S., the federal government offers nearly everyone a chance to go to college and pay much-much later. As a consequence, many (but not all) students don’t think about the long-term financial consequences of their choices.

And the U.S. is still in a demographic shift. For example, when I was growing up, parents did not need a college degree to provide a good life for their children. They could own a home. Medical insurance was affordable. And the message has long been to the middle class that a college degree is a ticket to something better.

但沒有人阻止他們這樣做。相反，我們鼓勵這樣的做法。

在美國，聯邦政府幾乎為每個人都提供了上大學的機會，並可以在很久以後支付學費。因此，許多（但不是所有）學生，都沒有考慮過他們的選擇會帶來的長期經濟後果。

美國的人口結構仍在發生變化。例如，在我成長的過程中，父母不需要大學學歷就能為孩子提供美好的生活。他們可以擁有一個家。 醫療保險是負擔得起的。長期以來，人們一直在向中產階級傳達這樣一個信息：大學學位是通往更好事業的門票。

But things have changed significantly, but I think that’s a bit beyond the question.

In short, many students still believe that a college—any college degree is necessary to be successful. Consequently, many students will take any ‘ole college degree. Very, very little public emphasis is placed on the economic consequences of that choice.

但現在情況已經發生了重大變化，但我認為這已經超出了你提的問題的範疇。

簡言之，許多學生仍然相信大學——任何大學學位都能成為成功的必要條件。因此，許多學生將跑去獲得任何一個類別的大學學位。公眾很少強調這種選擇的經濟後果。

Mike Azeka

From a very young age, US children are encouraged to pursue their desires and what they like, rather than what is best for them, so they don’t seriously consider the question of what to study AND to try hard to succeed. I know several people with expensive useless masters degrees (cultural anthropology, gender studies, mycology, European history from 1675 to 1730) and they never thought they were harming their lives. Their choices probably contributed to: long bouts of unemployment, student debt, divorce, semi-poverty, family estrangement, having to settle for unfulfilling jobs that paid low wages, etc. Of course, their professors didn’t try very hard to discourage them from pursuing these useless degrees. Why invalidate your own life?

My advice is to study what you LOVE as a side interest, but focus on what you LIKE and that you see yourself doing, and that has a career, for at least 5-

從很小的時候起，美國兒童就被鼓勵去追求自己的慾望和喜歡的東西，而不是對他們最有利的東西，所以，他們不會認真考慮需要學習什麼，和需要努力去取得什麼樣的成功。

我認識幾個擁有昂貴無用碩士學位的人（文化人類學、性別研究、真菌學、1675年至1730年的歐洲歷史），他們從未想過這會傷害到自己的生命。他們的選擇可能導致：長期失業、學生債務、離婚、半貧困、家庭疏遠、不得不接受低工資、沒有成就感的工作等。

當然，他們的教授並沒有極力阻止他們攻讀這些無用的學位。為什麼要去證明自己是錯誤的呢？

我的建議是，把你喜歡的東西作為副業來研究，但要專注於你喜歡的和你認為自己值得做的事情，至少有5年這樣的職業生涯。

原創翻譯：龍騰網 https://www.ltaaa.cn 轉載請註明出處

David Parker

Many non-science degrees are relatively easy to achieve.

Facts are slighted

Feelings and prejudice are encouraged and rewarded with accolades

Math is discouraged and discounted

Science programs tend (not always) to be rigorous and math-centric

What is an often passionate, impetuous, academically unambitious young person to do?

1、許多非科學學位相對容易獲得。

2、事實被輕視了。

3、自我的感受和偏見被鼓勵了，並被授予了榮耀。

4、數學讓人氣餒，並被認為是不重要的。

5、科學項目往往（並不總是）非常嚴格且以數學為中心。

一個經常充滿激情、衝動、並在學術上沒有野心的年輕人該怎麼辦？

Yegor Plam

Exactly. STEM is hard, period. The average STEM’er has to WORK to absorb that STEM education. Who wants to work in college these days? Luckily, the higher-principled social justice path is also easier. Higher principle and easy-peasy… that’s hard to resist.

確實。STEM很難的。強調一次：STEM很難的。典型的學習STEM的人，必須努力的吸收STEM的教育。在大學的時候，誰會想工作的事情？幸運的是，是非觀念更強的社會正義道路卻更容易學。更高的是非觀念、更簡單的技巧……這很難抗拒。

Steve Taylor

No. They aren’t rich. And while I don’t want to mock these students, the unbelievable irony is that the no-questions asked attitude of the Federal government re: handing out large student loans actually creates the need for more “social justice” because it increases financial hardship.

In the government’s well-intentioned effort to bring “equal opportunity” to education, it shackles kids with debt that realistically a “social justice degree” is never going to be able to pay off.

不，他們並不富有。

雖然我不想嘲笑這些學生，但令人難以置信的諷刺是，聯邦政府對發放大額學生貸款採取了不多過問的態度，這產生了對更多“社會正義”學位的需求，也增加了經濟困難。

在政府為教育帶來“平等機會”的善意努力中，它給孩子們戴上了債務的枷鎖，而實際上學習“社會正義學位”的人永遠無法償還掉貸款。

I’m not in favor of preventing anyone from studying what they want to study — I have a Master’s degree in Folklore and half of an MFA in studio art that I quit, so who am I to preach? — but I do think it would be in the interest of social justice itself if the Federal government, before handing out a loan, simply required you to get a double major or a dual Master’s degree. You can get your so-called “social justice type degree,” but you have to get something else with it. One half of that degree has to be in a field more likely to get you a decent-paying job.

“Social justice type students” want people to have decent-paying jobs… while curiously screwing themselves out of them.

You can still pursue social justice while not being excessively beholden to the Feds who are now collecting interest on your education, crushing your ability ever to own a home, etc.

我不贊成阻止任何人學習他們想學習的東西——我有民俗學碩士學位和半個工作室藝術碩士學位，後面那個我半途放棄了，這樣的我沒有什麼可以對想學這些的人説教的——但我確實認為，如果聯邦政府在發放貸款之前，對於學習社會正義類學位的人，要求你必須獲得雙專業或雙碩士學位，這將符合社會正義學位人士本身的利益。

你可以獲得所謂的“社會正義型學位”，但你必須獲得其他學位。其中的另外一個學位，可以幫助你獲得一份高薪的工作。

“社會正義型學生”希望人們有體面的工作……同時卻奇怪的把自己的事情搞砸了。

你仍然可以追求社會正義，同時不必過度感激聯邦政府，他們現在正在對你的教育收取利息，摧毀你擁有房子的能力，等等。