Most of the criticism i have regarding the humanities and philosophy in particular does not apply to the american situation as people there pay for their own education.
if a private individual wants to spend some time developing as a human being, reading classic texts, admiring thinkers of past ages and polishing his rhetoric and is willing to pay. then i say that's a good choice and power to him.
if a government pays for someone to train in something which serves no economic purpose, then the government is wasting its money.
i do like philosophy. i love a good argument. i read 'philosophy magazine'. but i don't think the garbageman should have to pay for my habit.
So how do you square that with the fact that a lot of secondary education is not remotely "useful" for most jobs?
The most common argument I've heard for universal secondary education is that some amount of liberal education is necessary for a functioning democracy. Which I think is definitely true, and the only question is where to draw the line. It's clear to me that we shouldn't draw the line prior to literacy and basic numeracy, but it's not clear why the current position of the line -- right between secondary and higher education -- is more meritorious than any other position.
usually it's some combination of parents and government backed loans or grants
even when people pay for their own education in the form of future loans, they're doing so with highly imperfect information about what it will mean to pay them back
(which I don't think is necessarily an argument against studying philosophy, learning to think rigorously can be highly practical)
if a private individual wants to spend some time developing as a human being, reading classic texts, admiring thinkers of past ages and polishing his rhetoric and is willing to pay. then i say that's a good choice and power to him.
if a government pays for someone to train in something which serves no economic purpose, then the government is wasting its money.
i do like philosophy. i love a good argument. i read 'philosophy magazine'. but i don't think the garbageman should have to pay for my habit.