When you hear or read the expression “educated person,” what comes to mind? Someone who is well read? Someone who is capable of writing tight, meaningful prose? Someone who knows how to change the carburetor in your car?
When I hear the expression “educated person,” I immediately think of someone who has at least a bachelor’s degree (the more degrees, the better); they know what’s going on in the world and they keep abreast of politics; they read literature (whatever that may be); speaking a foreign language or two doesn’t hurt. When I look at my assessment of the expression “educated person” or, even more specifically, “well-educated person,” I now realize just how narrow-minded and arrogant my understanding of the expression is.
Certainly, the above describes a type of an “educated person.” But to say that, if someone doesn’t have a degree or they’re not up-to-speed on world politics, they’re not an educated person, is just being snooty, elitist. A good example of this snooty elitism is how I and many others view mechanics.
Mechanics have a rather dirty job. They get grease all over themselves; they lie on the ground an awful lot, poking around underneath our dirty vehicles. I’d say a huge number of people view everyday mechanics as “uneducated” or “poorly educated.” And sure, if you hold up a college education, being well read, etc. as meaning “well educated,” you’re right - many (but certainly not all) mechanics are “poorly educated.” However, this judgment starts to fall apart when you flip things around. From the mechanic’s point of view, perhaps the college-graduating, literature-reading people are the “uneducated” ones. Why, they’re not quite sure how to change the oil in their cars; they can’t figure out a basic engine problem, one that any mechanic would see within 15 minutes; hell, they don’t even know how much air is supposed to go in the tires of their vehicle!
In other words, I think it would be fair to say that many people look down their noses at mechanics and many other people who do “dirty work.” However, it’s interesting to note that, if every person who did a “dirty” job stopped working for a month, a week - even a mere day - we’d all be in trouble. Garbage would quickly pile up; sewers would overflow due to lack of maintenance; our gas-guzzling vehicles would sit in our driveways (paved excellently by those “uneducated manual laborers”). In short, we’d all be in trouble. That’s putting it politely, by the way - a more appropriate expression would contain a six-letter word beginning with f.
Strictly speaking for myself, I need to stop equating educated with book-smart, which is a decent summation of my previous thinking. You can be illiterate and still be educated in some form or another; you can be extremely literate and not know how to do anything. I like to consider myself “educated,” and I couldn’t begin to tell you how to change the carburetor, in any vehicle - mine included.
16 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://system13.org/2007/11/09/what-makes-an-educated-person-educated/trackback/
November 10, 2007 at 6:44 am
Nils
That’s always been a discussion humanists and social democrats struggle with. One could argue that educated and skilled are two different things. But since a mechanic (to use the example) did get the necessary education somewhere, and since a university graduate may have no real useful skills at all (I know plenty) the terms become useless.
I’d say that educated implies a theoretical point of view, the capacity to make connections on a larger scale, and that you “know what you’re talking about”, whether you learnt this at Oxford or at home. Skilled, talented, well-versed, etc. could all indicate a more focused, hands-on approach that just “works”, whether you know why or not.
This could apply to writing, design, art, or operating a crane. And we need every single one of those.
Intellectual, is another word that springs to mind. “Partaking in academic discussion and being an opinion leader” would apply to that.
It’s true though: these are socially determined semantics we’re stuck with and I, for one, hate seeing parents whose kids are unhappy because doing what they’re good at just isn’t “good enough”.
It’s these people who are “un-educated” in my book.
PS: you’re on a blogging roll! remember that post when you were in a slump? Also, good design change. Nothing drastic, still familiar, yet fresh and with enhanced usability. Why no more header pic though?
November 10, 2007 at 8:37 am
Tom
That’s interesting, I see your distinction (Josh and Nils) but for some reason I never had these prejudices if you will.
For me an educated person was just one who received education. So a Ph.D. wielding lexically impeccable Oxford scholar was “better” educated than a mechanic only because he’d spent more time at school. I never considered him better or knowing more. The definition was always very simple. Consequently, I was never intimidated by nor did I ever defer to the “educated”.
November 10, 2007 at 9:02 am
Rich
Nice post. Interesting point.
For me, someone like a mechanic is a skilled worker, not necessarily educated. I’ve always associated well-educated with academia. (Not to say a mechanic that studied at Uni first couldn’t be educated, too.)
I’ve been called well-educated before, and referred to as an “educated” person. But if anything, I’m distinctly uneducated. (Though I’m working on it.) I read literature, I’m pretty intelligent, I can speak two other languages (really badly), and understand another, I can translate Devanagari scripts, too (really slowly), and I speak like someone that went to Oxford (”posh twat”). I’ve got all the traits of an “educated” person, except the actual education. So how would you categorise that?
November 10, 2007 at 9:03 am
Rich
Oh, and I believe it’s labo[u]rers that pave our driveways, not labors.
November 10, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Josh
@Rich: Thanks for the correction; it’s fixed.
@RichX2 and everyone else: I’ll respond to your comments in a bit. Nap time now.
November 10, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Cheryl
Somewhere in this discussion is the concept of ’street smarts’. Folks who have a limited education, maybe not even graduating high school and do not have a love, interest or use for reading. These people have skills that are overlooked by most of us. They seem more ‘present oriented’. If there was a real crisis, I would choose to be near someone who has street smarts than several phD’s, speaking many languages and ability to critiques modern art.
November 10, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Nils
@Rich: a posh twat translating Devanagari? Now I demand a podcast!
November 11, 2007 at 1:50 am
Tom
“@Rich: Thanks for the correction; it’s fixed.”
Revisionist historian.
November 11, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Josh
@Nils:
Agreed. Probably the most typical example of that is when a kid who loves art, and who is good at art, ends up going to medical or law school, because that’s what their parents want them to do. To the parents, it doesn’t matter that the kid likes art and hates medicine / law; the latter make great money, the former not so great.
Hah, yeah, once I got over the “oh my god I’m not posting enough” nonsense, it became a lot easier to, erm, post.
Regarding the theme: yep, I love this theme. It’s Tarski (tarskitheme.com). About the header - to verify, you do see the System 13 logo and the text to the right that says “not a science blog”, right? If you mean the galaxy thing, though - it didn’t fit with the design, at all. I didn’t have the original galaxy background picture, and when I tried to scale up the old header to fit the dimensions for this theme, it looked awful. So, I went with the light gray gradient with the logo; thought it matched the theme better.
@Tom:
Good on you, then - seriously.
@Rich:
See, I don’t think that’s quite right. My dad was a diesel mechanic, and a few of my brothers, while they’re not mechanics by profession now, they have been in the past. I’ve listened to them talk about engines, etc., and there’s more going on there than mere “skill.” They’re knowledgeable about it. However, they didn’t study the subject at university. Knowledge is knowledge, no?
Erm… complicated.
It’s difficult to say where the jump from uneducated to educated is. Some would say that speaking two languages - even badly - is educated. Others would say it’s not.
@Cheryl:
Amen to that! Indeed, I didn’t touch on “street smarts”, but you’re right - in regards to the topic at hand, street smarts has an important place. I’ve met my fair share of people who didn’t have any real “proper” education that had wonderful “street smarts”; I’ve also met people that were highly educated and didn’t have a clue as to how the world really works.
@Tom: Hah! When I read that, I literally laughed out loud. It also reminds me that I want to write a post on revisionist history and the problems the term brings up - but, like I said - another post.
November 11, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Nils
Just to confirm: I do see the logo. Just wondering why you ditched the galaxy. Maybe you could find a bigger, better-looking one? But it’s okay like this too. No worries.
November 12, 2007 at 1:48 am
cooper
Not all educated people know what is going on in the world; some have a very narrow focus, often on or around their own discipline. It amazes me how little some academics know about what goes on in the world away from academia.
To some degree your original thoughts are right on. Education relies heavily on the piling on of knowledge. For everything we learn we have the ability to learn more. I see educated people as people who have a cumulative body of knowledge in one or more disciplines, people who have learned to use logic, and who are able to continually increase their knowledge about any given thing based on their previous learning’s - whether it be multidisciplinary or in a single field.
In some cases one can have the same result if self educated it is just not as likely.
You feel guilty because you think less of people who do not have formal education. Mechanics may or may not be educated though they are certainly trained. It isn’t the same thing.
You don’t need to feel guilty for thinking they are less educated you just need to feel guilty because you think less of them.
November 13, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Gnorb
“I am the very model of the modern Major-General
I’ve information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical…”
November 15, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Josh
@Nils: I might put a bigger galaxy shot up, similar to my previous header. I’m not sure, though. From what I saw while the old header was still up, it seemed a bit too dark, too overpowering when thrown in with this theme.
@cooper: I’m going to take a stab and guess that you’re cooper from 9rules, yes? (If not, that’s fine, too.)
Well said.
I’m trying to work on tearing down my ivory tower, which I’m afraid I’ve been residing in for a while now.
@Gnorb: You’re so strange.
What’s that from?
March 27, 2008 at 5:38 am
Aadil
There is no need to education. It is not that you read a book, pass an examination, and finish with education. The whole of life, from the moment you are born to the moment you die, is a process of learning.
March 27, 2008 at 7:55 am
Josh
Aadil: I’d say it really depends on what someone is wanting to do. You certainly learn a lot from life, but for things, you do need special training of one sort or another.
And, welcome!
May 1, 2008 at 9:06 am
Sarah
Is there such a distinct definition then between ‘being educated’ and ‘being trained’? Are both necessary to the realization and development of an ‘educated person’?
Training involves direction and instruction, you can apply such tactics to animals and gain desired response (Pavlov). You would’t assert that the animal is ‘educated’ and in this way education is quite different from training. However humans are rational beings and naturally have a greater capacity for reason, the processes of training does not ultimately create robots who perform an operation with no other thought. The human mind even of a trained mechanic still has to cope with intuition, judgement and consequence. Certainy there is knowledge here, but the knowledge is practical and applicable to a particual circumstance only.
Education is not better than training, it is merely different. An educated person will have undergone a process of learning that enhances mental capabilities and intelligence which they can use in personal, intellectual and novel situations. Being ‘educated’ differs according to place and culture. In western society bachelors and PHD’s are impressive and tick the boxes for being ‘edcuated’, but put this person in the gibson desert and see who is deemed the more edcuated, the one who studied classics or is able to ‘translate Devanagari scripts,’ or the aboriginal people who have never been to universities, but know the difference between poisonous creatures and the safe ones, and know how to survive.
Back to engalnd… now higher education is more accessible to the masses, having an education does not necessarily put you in better stance compared to those who are trained. Our society is so competitive, there will be so many educated people without jobs, whereas there will always be a demand for those who have trained in a particular profession. Education or training has to have a use, in the desert the use is survival, here the use ultimately is surival by means of money.Historically knowledge was seen as sinful, aspiring to be Godlike (genesis), those who have knowledge today sometimes lose morals and become very self absorbed, whilst horizons are meant to be broadened, socially they become very narrow minded. There is a social stigma attatched to tradesmen or those who do the ‘dirty work’ and ironically it is the ‘educated’ person who is more knowledgable about the world who is responsible for attatching such demeaning lables!