in the real world incompetent humanities scholars get found out quickly too.
no humanities scholars have formed or are running the government. where is the current fake academic in the truss cabinet? the only person trained with an academic postgraduate research degree is kwasi (cambridge PhD in economics, not a humanities subject and not your infamous effete toff oksferd).
there is no professional body accrediting 'competence' as a politician. what would that look like? technocrats à la enarques in france, i presume? even that is a postgraduate school with its own (supposed) standards and robust examinations, functioning somewhat like a law or business school. there is no equivalent in the UK. there is only the PPE undergraduate degree – a sandwich course of light academic merit and breezy synopsis put together as a fast-track for ambitious politicos. if you want to debate the value of PPE as a course with me, let's go ahead: i've told you umpteen times that no academics take it seriously, either. there aren't 'world experts' in PPE, or 'prestigious' journals of PPE. it's a course designed and put together for a very specific slice of society to skip on through to whitehall and westminster.
i said before that your broadsides are inaccurate and ill-advised. you don't have to state that 'all historians are partaking in a circle-jerk because they don't have an institute of accredited engineers for history' in order to make the point that PPE graduates are often disconnected, westminster-bubble isolates, bought and sold by thinktanks and big money donors. humanities scholars don't think highly of PPE ffs!
once again, a sandwich undergraduate course that picks a chef's selection of no fewer than 3/4 academic disciplines does not produce 'scholars'. you aren't even a 'scholar' in a single subject after getting an undergraduate degree. that's not how it works. why do you have to be reminded of this every fucking week? it is inane. nobody goes out into the world as a recognised and representative 'scholar' of an academic field after reading it for 3 years between the ages of 18–21. you do know what the term
undergraduate denotes, right?
How many free passes do parlimentarians give each other?
what does it have to do with humanities scholars, dilbert? or the professional ethics and conduct of academics? how often do bankers or people in finance 'look the other way' and poorly self-regulate? how often do engineers not follow every process to the letter and end up contributing to a grenfell tower and hundreds of people dying? the real world, as i said, is determined a lot by ambition, greed, lust for power -- and money. what the fuck does how humanities degrees are conferred/ratified have to do with this? you mad pillock. do you really think an engineer or scientist elected to government is immune from having their palm greased or of toeing a party line? that godbrain STEM graduates can't possess toxic political ideologies or subscribe to silly libertarian fundamentalist ideas? (cough, look at yourself and your own host of ideological idée fixes). again: marvel movie universe stuff.
Last edited by uziq (2022-10-04 02:59:31)