> Who said school had anything to do with having a full education?
A few quotes from the website:
"With interdisciplinary, world-changing teachers like Einstein, Descartes, and Socrates, St. John’s students have a competitive advantage in any field."
"Offering comprehensive undergraduate and graduate liberal arts programs"
"Our liberal arts undergraduate program is a truly comprehensive education that is perhaps the most rigorous in America."
"St. John’s College is persuaded that a genuine liberal education requires the study of great books—texts of words, symbols, notes, and pictures—because they are both timeless and timely. These books are the most important teachers. They illuminate the persisting questions of human existence and they bear directly on the problems we face today. They express most originally, and often most perfectly, the ideas by which contemporary life is knowingly or unknowingly governed. Their authors can speak to us almost as freshly as when they spoke for the first time, for what they have to tell us is not of merely academic concern, nor is it remote from our true interests. They change our minds, move our hearts, and touch our spirits."
This statement is especially grandiose: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2615/9916/9280/St_John...
> If you're in culinary school to begin with, you probably care about food and you will be able to teach yourself the rest from that base.
I know many people who went to culinary school in America because they were inspired by the food they grew up with and wanted to learn more so they could start a restaurant or study it or something, and were disappointed when it was mostly French cooking and their culture was barely touched on. In that case, the school did not fit their expectations and desires. I'm sure that culinary schools meet most student's expectations or they wouldn't continue to exist, but I think it's worth mentioning that all the top schools seem to follow the same basic pattern, at least from what I've been told. It's not like you can pick the French school or the West African school or the Japanese school when you're an American looking to enter a school in your country. Anyway I think I should stop talking about this because I really don't know much about culinary schools, I just meant it as a loose analogy.
> SJC is the same way. They're fitting the curriculum to the expectations and desires of their incoming students. The whole point of that education is to teach you how to think for yourself, not to fill your head with data points.
I'm not sure what you mean by data points, but I guess what I'm saying is if I wanted to design a curriculum around the fundamentals of thinking for myself, I would want to make it as varied and and broad as possible. I want to know how everybody thinks, not just people near me. If I'm reading the foundational texts of American history, I also want to read those of Chinese history. I want to read the Koran along with the Bible (and maybe multiple translations/interpretations of each). I want to read Ramayana along with the Iliad.
I understand that not everybody wants the same things as me! Again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with studying Western thought. I just think it's wrong to talk about the greatest books and thinkers and teachers when there's an implicit "of the Western canon" next to each of those. Just be open about it, and it's ok.
> School, ...ANY... school, is just about establishing a baseline to make you comparable against your peers.
No modern student should believe that their only peers are Western-educated.
> In both cases, I don't think you really understand the point of what you're looking at.
I guess I agree.