John Ogozalek teaches high school in upstate New York. He watched some of the GOP debate last night (his stomach is stronger than mine) and reacted to one of Marco Rubio’s memorable lines.
He writes:
“A great howler from the GOP debate last night:
“We need more welders and less philosophers…” Marco Rubio
Now I wish I could weld. Seriously. 10 years of Upstate New York winters have seriously rotted my car. And, I’ve had plenty of great students who go into trades like welding. I respect people who can do these jobs.
But, c’mon. Can Marco Rubio aim any lower?
Why can’t welders ALSO be philosophers??? (And, vice versa!)
Neil Postman wrote a great piece, a graduation speech, he never had a chance to give. I used it years ago when I taught ninth grade Global Studies. http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2009/06/athenians-and-visigoths-neil-postmans-graduation-speech/
Postman compares the Athenians, who valued wisdom and art to the Visigoths, who believed that the quest for knowledge is useless if it doesn’t give you power and money. Athenians cherished and respected the written word. In comparison, “A Visigoth’s language aspires to nothing higher than the cliche.”
Postman wrote, “And I must tell you that you do not become an Athenian merely by attending school or accumulating academic degrees. My father-in-law was one of the most committed Athenians I have ever known, and he spent his entire adult life working as a dress cutter on Seventh Avenue in New York City. On the other hand, I know physicians, lawyers, and engineers who are Visigoths of unmistakable persuasion.”
Welders CAN be Athenians. They CAN be philosophers. To say otherwise, is just to further divide our own already damaged polis.
I could only stomach part of the GOP debate. But what I saw indicated how far our nation’s ability to have a mature, civil discourse has fallen. What happened to the days when the League of Women Voters hosted serious debates in which booing and hissing was not tolerated? And, remember when Gerald Ford slipped up about communist domination of Eastern Europe, and his feet were held to the fire for the mistake? Nowadays a buffoon like Donald Trump can say anything regardless of the facts…..and his political life thrives.
No, Marco Rubio is just this year’s model…..a faster, trimmer more high tech version of the age old Visigoth pattern. Do anything for power and money even if it means dividing the people you profess to lead.
By the way…..I’m sitting here at home writing on this blog, with a day off from school. But, of course, this day is really meant to honor our veterans, past and present. It’s those veterans who deserve the credit for defending our nation against Visigoths like the Nazis. We honor them by standing up for the “better angels of our nature” -not by rolling in the political mud.
Reading Neil Postman’s great speech is one of the best ways I can honor our vets and our country. Taking part in this blog, “a site to discuss better education for all,” is another.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Reblogged this on World's Greatest Detective of Education and commented:
Close your eyes to the world… and do your work. “More Welders, Less Philosophers” is not only a false dichotomy, but the perfect agenda for a Fascist State.
A little note on Rubio’s grammar:
The proper adjective to use in front of a noun designating a number of persons, places, things, etc. would be “fewer”, not “less”.
Also, if Rubio wanted to use “less” — an adjective for non-numerical quantities of something — he could have said “more welding, less philosophy.”
That’s just my college-educated intellectual snobbery coming through 😉
Wrong.
The proper grammar would be:
“We need greater weld-ologizers, fewer philosophizers.”
Some college education you got.
Well, Neil Postman was a prescient man. I highly recommend his books which are a delight to read as well as informative!
The “welders not philosophers” idea is really popular among politicians. As far as I can tell, it started with Scott Walker. He was defending his lousy jobs record by claiming there were tons of jobs- it’s just that people lack “skills”.
Here’s President Obama saying essentially the same thing:
“I promise you folks can make a lot more, potentially, with skilled manufacturing or the trades than they might with an art history degree,” Obama said in his speech Jan. 30, which was focused on better aligning job training programs with employer needs. “Now, nothing wrong with an art history degree — I love art history. So I don’t want to get a bunch of e-mails from everybody.”
It’s part of a larger theme in DC- wages aren’t rising for the middle class and that’s the fault of the middle class. I listened to the debate and I was dying for someone to ask Rubio what welders make. I would bet 50 dollars he has no idea.
I don’t know where they got the idea that vocational training is somehow disrespected. We have a vocational high school here and it’s been popular as long as I’ve been aware of it. No one disrespects the graduates. My middle son is one of them and we’re quite proud of him. I don’t know- maybe this “disrespect” idea is coming from what the politicians feel themselves? They should reflect on that 🙂
Marco’s comment not even grammatical!
Rubio criticized an apology President Obama made responding to an email from an art historian who expressed offense at the off-the-cuff dig about art history majors. Rubio wrote,”Pathetic Obama apology to art history prof. We do need more degrees that lead to #jobs,” on his Twitter account.
How transparent can you be??
There are so many good questions to ask the “welders not philosophers” crowd.
Here’s one. The organizations that trained people in skilled trades are called “labor unions”. That’s where the pipeline came from. Marco Rubio and the rest of them could learn about that here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sean-mcgarvey/its-national-apprenticesh_b_8450300.html
So why do so many politicians oppose labor unions, if they claim to to promote skilled trades? That would be a real stumper for them. Ask that.
Right on, John. Your post made me think of my grandfather who also worked on the garment industry on 7th Avenue in NYC. An accomplished musician with only a fifth grade education, he devoted much of his life to understanding the beauty and power of music. He taught me a lot about it, too. He also was an Athenian.
Thanks for sharing the Postman graduation speech. Very well done.
If we have a welder shortage, more people will become welders. I don’t think you need to craft an education policy to solve this problem.
Rubio is uneducated. and you are correct about compatibility of hard labor and philosophy. The paradigm for joining experience in labor with philosophy is Eric Hoffer: The Longshoreman Philosopher. http://www.hofferproject.org/HPhoffer.html
Well said. The problem now, intellectualism is passe’. They have yelled about education dumbing down society.
I see now what they meant.
Here’s the problem. We have ceded most vocational training to for-profit colleges and push 4-year college for everyone. The school districts in the Tucson area worked together to put in JTEP, a joint partnership voc ed program, with each school district offering different programs. Our current Koch-backed governor, Doug Ducey, cut the funding for it. ( Tim, we have open enrollment between districts in AZ) Now, in just the past few weeks I hear news stories about shortages of truck drivers and heavy equipment operators.
Rubio is the perfect rube for Wall St. Look at the politico story on his spending habits. Bling-bling petit bourgeois. So easy for Wall St to manipulate and so easy for the corporate media to identify with.
You got it right. This man has limited potential, and he is a real “shallow hal.” He is just another corporate shill, modeled after Jeb Bush.
I second Rubio’s motion. And I’m not a welder either.
Virginia, when you post comments like this, you pretend to be a fool. Think again.
To the owner of this blog: it’s not pretense.
He’s the rheeal deal.
And I’m so sure I would bet a 13th percentile against a 90th and a hero…
Really!
😎
Sen. Rubio also should know that he should have said “fewer philosophers,” not “less philosophers.” Sigh.
Very important point, Bonnie. Fewer philosophers, not less. His English teachers would be ashamed of him.
Wisely said, Mr. Ogozolek. This is a true defense of welders, like my own grandfather! Media fact-checkers quickly corrected Marco Rubio’s mistake last night when he called for more vocational education during the GOP debate: “Welders make more money than philosophers,” he said. “We need more welders than philosophers.” As has been widely pointed out in response to Sen. Rubio’s remark, those who major in philosophy at a college or university tend to have much higher average salaries than professional welders. But focusing on that point unfortunately distracts us from the important social issue at hand, which is about the mission of education.
Both major U.S. political parties have imbibed an educational model that identifies investment in the future with the need to grow techno-industrial sectors and thus jobs. It is sane for us to vote for jobs when we have so little control over the conditions through which we and our children can make a living, given the great inequalities of wealth and power built into our economic régime. But neither party consistently sees students and teachers as cooperative participants in the intelligent redirection of that régime. If our primary educational aim is to train students to usefully fit the narrow specifications of our existing economic infrastructure, then our best hope for cultural transformation is directed down the very channels that are implicated in our socio-economic, environmental, and geopolitical problems.
Steven Fesmire is Professor of Philosophy and Environmental Studies at Green Mountain College in Vermont. He is the author of Dewey (Routledge, 2015) and other books.
Prof Fesmire, while I respect philosophy majors, you obviously have no respect for engineering majors. What do you think engineers do? They analyze problems to identify the component parts. They determine how they might apply engineering principles in a creative way to solve the smaller problems. They have to explicitly state their assumptions and then verify those assumptions still hold when the component solutions are combined. This is all about modeling and requires a great amount of abstract reasoning, creativity and rigor.
For you to imply that all technical fields are “narrowly” training students for specific, menial “tech jobs” is not only grossly inaccurate but insulting to the great scientists who are the reason our standard of living is so high today. STEM is about learning to think while also developing practical, applicable skills. Some liberal arts majors may learn the former without the latter, but given the grade inflation in these majors, we know for sure that many aren’t learning much of anything in college.
Virginiasgp,
I’m afraid you’ve mistaken me for a popular stereotype: the elitist humanities intellectual who isolates humane studies from practical life and consequently disparages students and educators in STEM and other applied areas. Your high level of certainty about my level of respect for engineers is worrisome (and alas, your avowed respect for liberal arts majors is in logical tension with your closing remarks), but I must have activated the familiar stereotype with some of my word choices.
Let me try to clarify, as your concerns are representative. Educational debate in the United States is entangled in the notion that the mission of K-12 and higher education is, in Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s infamous words, “to develop human resources to meet the state’s workforce needs.” An industrial model of education has developed into a mostly unexamined prepossession that keeps a great many thoughtful and well-meaning people from meeting emerging problems in a way that furthers their own best values. (Here’s my Nov. 2 analysis of that model: http://chronicle.com/blogs/letters/what-we-lose-when-we-treat-education-like-an-industrial-sector/.)
My own view of the way forward is informed in part by John Dewey’s (1859-1952) insights. Dewey steered between the perennial extremes of those who champion a narrow vocational emphasis (education for the workforce), on the one hand, and those who advocate a liberal education purified of any occupational concerns (education of the head and not the hands), on the other hand. There is a legitimate need to infuse education with the interests students have in life’s occupations. Think of this as the integration of head, heart, and hands. Such an education in turn energizes and redirects those ever-evolving cultural practices. But, as Dewey insisted a century ago in Democracy and Education, we must not turn teachers and students into serfs for a “feudal dogma of social predestination.”
We all deserve an education that prioritizes human growth, emotional development, and aesthetic vitality. Everyone deserves a liberal cultural education, and STEM education should—and in some more progressive pockets already does—proceed within the broad context of such an education. In this way, the intellectual virtues of engineering education, which you rightly flagged, can richly inform other cultural practices, and the arts & humanities can in turn inform STEM education. Aside from education reformers on the far right, many political conservatives and progressives could converge–though perhaps for fundamentally different reasons–on policies that support this general outlook. It is the general outlook most compatible with a democracy.
Steven Fesmire
virginiasp,
“. . . we know for sure that many aren’t learning much of anything in college.”
That is an amazing talent you have. Being able to get inside the heads of all college students to know if any one of them learned much of anything. Damn, do you have patent for that or would you share how you learned to do that? TIA!
Duane,
Not really amazing, considering that he is ECONOMAD, he is perfect and that which is imperfect must be sterilized…
I also recommend Martha Nussbaum’s Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. An excellent book.
One of my classes is doing a writing exercise that addresses the remark President Obama made about the futility of studying art history. After giving it some thought, I can only conclude that there are those in power who would find it easier to control a less enlightened worker. Otherwise, there would be room for balance in “education reform.”
He was speaking about good paying jobs. Welders probably earn a lot more than a philosopher as well as other tradesmen and the vocations should be emphasized more. Not everyone should go to college to be successful. It is true that a welder can be a philosopher. He was not trying to demean anyone. This is a non issue.
APRIL, I don’t agree. This is just another sneer directed at liberal arts majors, like Rick Scott’s putdown of anthropology majors, Jeb Bush’s putdown of psychology majors, Obama’s putdown of Art history majors. What is it with these guys that they sneer at studies that broaden your knowledge?
I mostly agree with April, but there IS an important underlying issue, and it’s related to Prof. Ravitch’s point about the sneering toward liberal arts education. It’s true that a healthy economy is a public good. It’s equally true that it doesn’t serve this public good to treat students as pawns being prepared for the workaday world of adult life, nor does it serve this public good to treat teachers as functionaries. It does serve the public good when our various adult professions, occupations, and on-the-ground pursuits are energized by educational institutions that are cultures of imagination and growth. It also serves the public good when teachers, instead of being asked to hoe the straightest line toward testable skill acquisition, help students to imagine the conditions and challenges they face in light of what is possible. In a nutshell, everyone deserves and needs a liberal cultural education, whether K-12 or university.
Sorry, April, but that’s not the way I heard it last night during the debate. And, my son, Sam, was sitting right next to me. He’s a high school senior and he was so struck by Rubio’s comment that he wrote it down immediately. (I used his notes this morning.)
You wrote, “Not everyone should go to college to be successful.”
Of course, there are plenty of people who have done great things and never spent a day in college. College isn’t for everyone. But don’t our young people deserve the chance to make that decision on their own? Shouldn’t our kids have the opportunity to try college, to see for themselves if they want? As it is, too many of our citizens are now being priced out of that choice. And, I just don’t see Rubio’s typical G.O.P. survival-of-the-fittest retread ideas offering much hope. And, for me that is definitely an issue.
CBS News had a story tonight about the skyrocketing cost of a college education in the U.S. and how it will affect the financial future of our children. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-student-loans-getting-in-the-way-of-retirement/
It doesn’t matter if someone is a welder or a philosopher.. we all hope for our kids to have a better future. On that we can surely agree.
john asks “What happened to the days when the League of Women Voters hosted serious debates”
The League of Women Voters stopped hosting the debates in 1988 precisely because the two major parties were making demands that threatened to make the “debates” into a sham and what the League referred to as a “hoodwinking of the American public”
The League refused to be a part of it and since the League stopped hosting, the ‘debates” have indeed become a sham.
In fact, during the last Presidential campaign, the committee controlling the debates (which was made up of Democratic and Republican party hacks) actually had green Party candidates Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala arrested and detained — handcuffed to metal chairs — for 8 hours in a warehouse so that they could not attend the debate as spectators or even watch it on TV.
Would you please tell me where the info came from that that the Green Party candidates were handcuffed to metal chairs for 8 hours? I’m not saying it’s untrue – I’m saying I’d like to know the source. Thank you.
Frankly, I don’t think a forum with 10 candidates can be called a “debate.” No debate occurs. None. Zip.
A debate means an exchange of views among opposing sides. Not sound bites from each candidate
Finding this with a search on “Jill Stein handcuffed” is simple, but here’s a link
I did not take Rubio’s comments to be demeaning of liberal arts majors (and I am one), but talking about the need to recognize that students do have different interests, talents and ambitions. We are trying to provide more pathways in our school district for kids to get technical training, through partnering with the local community colleges so they can earn certifications while still in high school. We’re partnering with local farms to reignite interest in agriculture (which has a lot of STEM elements), and beginning some entrepreneur classes.
I’m disappointed that instead of proposing to start a constructive dialogue with the Rubio camp on these issues, there is the rush to “spin” his comments and insult his intelligence. There IS a need for more vocational opportunities, there is a bias to push kids toward college, and be disappointed in them if they choose differently. The kids who want to go to college are now pressured to take AP classes to prove they can pass “college level” classes at 15 or 16, when they cognitively are still developing. The ridiculous inflation of college costs has made many degrees cost far more than the potential earnings of some majors. Pay isn’t the big motivator for some careers (teaching, for example), but graduating with huge debt can take some of the joy out of the endeavor. Now, in some fields to be seen as competitive, you need an advanced degree.
If you’re going to be outraged, direct it in a productive manner. I doubt any of the candidates on either side of the aisle has been spending much time on education issues, since the media shows no interest in asking about their views. There’s got to be a more effective strategy to propose positive changes than just dissing all the candidates. Find a way to engage them–like you would a student.
Wonder which is greater:
•the percentage of eligible voters who know that Rubio should have said “‘fewer’ philosophers”
or
•the percentage of eligible voters who will actually cast ballots for President in November 2016
TAGO!
Booklady, I have a suggestion for a third choice. Consider:
– percentage of righteous, irrelevant grammarians who will now proceed to their local supermarket to scold the express lane for using “10 items or less“