CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Is it relevent to me, no. Good for them I have mine too doesn't mean that I have to make it known to people. I can't tell you how many people I speak to who have never been to college and do a great job at making it work. They are smart too and probably have a lot more experience than most of these people who do go to school.
A degree is absolutely useless if you cannot prove your knowledge first hand then I will consider you unworthy of the degree you hold so high.
Truly though if you cannot provide the knowledge that you were supposed to have learned that tells me that you simply sat through the class and tried a minimal amount.
If they can prove their knowledge then good for them. A degree does not provide authority over others.
Well, considering that you can't verify anyone's claims on the internet... I don't care or pay much attention to whatever degree anyone says they have.
Well, considering that you can't verify anyone's claims on the internet... I don't care or pay much attention to whatever degree anyone says they have.
To give a little background on this debate, Thewayitis asked how I knew what scientists meant when they used the word "theory" I responded by Quoting the Executive director for the center for science education, and then asks if I have asked scientists if that is what they mean by "Theory".
I again respond by giving a source to a technical definition of the word theory and then Stating that I have a science degree and in fact I have spoken to many scientists (most being old professors of mine) and that anybody who has graduated High school should know that Theory has a specific meaning in science which differs from the colloquial usage. That is when Thewayitis created this debate. I'm still waiting for a response to those posts. So in these circumstances my response was entirely relevant to the discussion. I have given copious evidence and reasoning to support my argument, his only recourse was denial.
What you failed to post is your attempt to convince me that one that has a degree is an expert.
Well, generally YES. To acquire a degree in something requires a certain level of study and familiarization in that field and has been tested on numerous occasions and has passed such tests beyond what a normal person is capable of.
This is not to say a person without the degree is not knowledgeable in that area, but that they are significantly less likely to be so. In nearly all cases, an advanced degree implies expertise.
Would you have someone perform open heart surgery on you who didn't go to medical school? I certainly hope not.
How does the presence of a degree in anyway imply lack of experience? How does the lack of a degree imply experience? Your statement is completely nonsensical.
A degree doesn't automatically say one has any experience and neither does not having a degree. The only way to gain true knowledge of something is by actually doing it.
No degree without experience will equal experience.
Yes, but you don't just get a degree. They require YEARS of study, and YEARS of being tested in proficiency in that area, whereas someone who doesn't have a degree isn't required of any of that, it is still possible to gain expertise in that area without one but it is not nearly as likely. Especially something dealing with science which is much more study intensive.
"They require YEARS of study, and YEARS of being tested in proficiency in that area, whereas someone who doesn't have a degree isn't required of any of that.."
Anybody apply for a job has to pass the requirements for that job whether they have a degree or not. One has to show they have knowledge not a degree. A degree doesn't prove intelligence, it only proves you can take test.
A lab assistant of twenty years that has a two year degree is more qualified than someone that never had a job and got their masters degree in the same field.
Anybody apply for a job has to pass the requirements for that job whether they have a degree or not.
That depends on the Job. If you are going to teach, you need a teaching degree. You need a medical degree to become a doctor. So for some jobs, a degree is a requirement.
A degree doesn't prove intelligence
The purpose of a degree is to prove competency in a given field, not overall intelligence.
The purpose of a degree is to get someone to throw their money away on a piece of paper. It is nothing more, but a piece of paper.
It is not a qualification. If it was something more, so many wouldn't be flipping hamburgs that have them. Nor is it a status symbol, so one can look down upon others.
A conclusion you derived at from your vehement enmity towards modern academia. Certainly not a researched opinion, but one of emotion and distrust. The paper itself means nothing, it is merely a proof that a person has completed X amount of study and has shown proficiency in a given field. For many jobs (as I've already explained) it is a qualification. Many Jobs do require a degree. That you don't like it, doesn't make it any less true.
"A conclusion you derived at from your vehement enmity towards modern academia. Certainly not a researched opinion, but one of emotion and distrust."
It certainly is a researched opinion and the opinion of many highly educated people.
“Blind respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” Einstein
“Challenge conventional wisdom and never accept the truth of something merely because everyone else views it as obvious.” Fredrich Haller Einstein’s first employer
“Most of the learning in use, is of no great use. Ben Franklin
“You can buy education, but wisdom is a gift from God.” unknown
“Without wisdom, knowledge is more stupid than ignorance.” Unknown
“The value of college education is not the learning of many facts, but the training of the mind to think.” Einstein
"A man who has never gone to school may steal from a freight car; but if he has a university education, he may steal the whole railroad."
Theodore Roosevelt
"To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society."
Theodore Roosevelt
"Information is not knowledge."
Albert Einstein
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education."
Albert Einstein
"The only source of knowledge is experience."
Albert Einstein
"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education."
Albert Einstein
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."
Albert Einstein
“An expert is someone who tells you something you already know...in terms you cannot understand.” Unknown
If you want me to continue my list of researched opinions, please let me know. There are hundreds of them.
"To view a sentiment as false because it is held with authority is no better than to view it as truth because it is held with authority. In either case authority does not determine veracity. Evidence alone is the juror of truth." ~Bohemian
The government is the single biggest employer of educated people and we all see the job they do.
I'm sure they do, but as an average I'd be willing to bet that pharmaceutical companies hire far more educated people.
That's a whole different animal. Politicians on the chance that they know what they're supposed to do, don't because they're trying to appeal to the ignorant masses.
Many degree programs require an individual to actually apply what they have learned in order for completion. Art degree programs and other kinesthetic fields come to mind. Certain medical degrees also require internship.
These are just a few examples where experience is required for the completion of a degree program.
Bohemian brought up what I would consider a very good question to which I hope to see your answer:
Would you have someone perform open heart surgery on you who didn't go to medical school?
"Would you have someone perform open heart surgery on you who didn't go to medical school?"
I don't have a choice in the matter, because all surgeons are required to get a degree. What would be a requirement before I undergo heart surgery is the number of years as a heart surgeon.
Your requirement of the number of years a heart surgeon is in practice is a moot point. For as you said "all surgeons are required to get a degree." Which is basically a good way of stepping around the question.
We always have a choice. I could do open heart surgery... or attempt it at least. Regardless of legal altercations, anyone could put blade to chest in this case. The question is whether you would allow someone who doesnt have a degree perform surgery on you? I would like to see if it really MATTERS to you. If not, than it should be a simple answer, one that I would hope you put to practice in the near future.
Sure. If there existed someone that has been doing open heart surgeries with a decent survival rate for at least ten years with no degree, schedule me in for surgery. A piece of paper makes no difference.
Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Eike Batista, and Larry Ellison are all billionaires without a business degree. Matter of fact, none have undergraduate degree.
Bill gates was in preparatory school when he was only 13 and then went on to go to Harvard. He scored a 1590 out of 1600 on the SAT. I think his understanding of business is greater than your average person. Even so, I would be very surprised if he didn't at any point have business advisers under his employment.
At any rate I would say that via running a billion dollar business does make one an expert on business. However that doesn't mean all opinions are equal, and certainly some people are much more knowledgeable about subjects they've spent all of their careers learning about. that someone who is not an expert on a topic is foolish to question someone who is. That is the point.
Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Eike Batista, and Larry Ellison are all billionaires without a business degree. Matter of fact, none have undergraduate degree.
So you are telling everyone if someone you know has a college degree then there is no reason for you to get one? Let's say your mom has a college degree; why did you go to college?
Whether a person works with someone or just associates with people that have degrees and such, so why get a degree? You've never learned anything from someone that wasn't paid to do so?
You claim that billionaires hired someone in business, so one can assume that if they merely hang around a college campus they will become just as educated.
Whether a person works with someone or just associates with people that have degrees and such, so why get a degree?
This isn't even a complete sentence. I don't know what you are trying to say.
You've never learned anything from someone that wasn't paid to do so? You claim that billionaires hired someone in business, so one can assume that if they merely hang around a college campus they will become just as educated.
What you are talking about is "intelligence by proxy", that simply by being around people who know things, you will know them too. This doesn't work for obvious reasons. You aren't going to get smarter just by being around a college campus. In order to learn from someone the most direct way is for them to divulge that information. Often influential people will hire advisers knowledgeable on some subject, who are paid to divulge such information so that their employers can make educated decisions. You don't have to pay someone to learn from them, but they won't be as obliged to divulge the information you need.
You're also not going to learn in one afternoon what took someone else 8 years to learn.
I know exactly want this debate is about, I started it. It is about arrogance and people that think they are better than others.
I never said I was better than anyone. Every man is in some way my superior.
But don't think you can best me in a subject in which I hold personal expertise. Know your limits. Just as I am not an expert on business. I have admitted that I was wrong about the number of billionaires who hold business degrees. It would be wise for you to admit your error on the usage of the term "theory" in science.
"But don't think you can best (beat) me in a subject in which I hold personal expertise." For someone that criticize my spelling, I hope your expertise isn't spelling. I believe it would be a draw.
Pick the subject and let's debate for money, say a thousand dollars. You can choose 3 people from here and I'll choose 3 people to be the judge. If there is a tie breaker I'll settle for whatever the owner of this site says (Andy). We can set the perimeters of the debate to limit it to just the two of us. We can also let Andy hold unto a thousand dollars from us and then send it to the winner. Providing this would be okay with him.
Just remember, you have a degree and the both of us have the world at our finger tips.
In what? Anybody who holds any expertise in science and the scientific method is familiar with the relevant terminology. This is what we are debating, the terminology.
Yes, and tell a marine biologist that he must be a linguist to know what other marine biologists mean when they say "Aquatic Fauna".
Do I need to be a linguist to know what a Command Sergeant Major (CSM) means when he says Charlie Mike? No one is more of an expert on terminology than the people who use it. Your statement is complete BS.
Although I wouldn't necessarily 'hang onto every word,' I would certainly consider one with a degree to be knowledgeable in the particular field that they have a degree in. When mentioning the achievement of gaining a degree, it lends the speaker some form of credibility in their argument as long as their degree is in a field that pertains to said argument. Otherwise, mentioning a degree would be irrelevant.
Bohemian: I haven't read one post from you that offered anything remotely useful or interesting. Instead, you prefer to lace your sentences together with extrordinary dullness and sarcasm. Is there anything at all you have to offer? Evidently not, the only appreciation you get is from yourself when you tag a post in your debate as "thanks Bohemian" and cannot even spell "you're" correctly which is something you critisize Thewayitis for, and no doubt other members also. You need to realize the point of debating and you also need to learn some manners - that way there may be a chance that more than a couple of atheists will like you.
Personal attacks such as this add little to a debate.
What do you think about someone who tells you what degree(s) they have?
Also, can you please clarify why a person being an atheist (or not) has any merit on their opinions concerning "the point of debating," and "manners?"
This is in regards to your quote "You need to realize the point of debating and you also need to learn some manners - that way there may be a chance that more than a couple of atheists will like you."
Furthermore, why is it important in debate for atheists (or theists for that matter) to like you?
Billie: It's posts like this that I accuse you of being childish and juvenile. You seem to crave melodrama. If anybody doubts this, we should recall the time you said I was an asshole and claimed you would no longer talk to me, and then spoke to me only a few posts later. Or the time you said you were leaving for good, only to return the next day. It's pure theatrics! You do this all for show.
PS. Also notice, I only criticize the spelling of those who first criticize. As long as you want to complain about contractions, perhaps then you want to change Its to It's in your previous post. Few people on this site have consistently perfect spelling or grammar (or care) so it's pointless to complain about it. So if you correct my spelling and grammar I will correct yours, otherwise I don't care as long as I can understand your meaning.
LOL, it wasn't the next day - but I just love how you change reality to suit your little world and arguments. Theatrics? Ok, so what about the time where you took every single statement I made out of its original context and twisted my words around and completely fucked up the discussion so that your argument appeared stronger? All for show, all for attention and to appear strong. Fail.
PS. Also notice, I only criticize the spelling of those who first criticize.
You are a hypocrite through and through. You criticize Thewayitis for not spelling correctly yet go on to do that exact same thing. Yet you still manage to find a way to justify this? Amazing.
perhaps then you want to change Its to It's in your previous post.
And you are still at it!!! Seriously, its incredible that you actually find anyone to have a mature discussion with you, you are the most dull and boring debater I have ever encountered - I think I mentioned that already though ;)
Few people on this site have consistently perfect spelling or grammar (or care) so it's pointless to complain about it.
Exactly, yet you have corrected two members in the same day for this very thing. What on earth is wrong with you? I'll bet its hard to pronounce.
I don't care as long as I can understand your meaning.
Oh, I'm sorry, 4 days later. It was still a theatrical production nonetheless.
Exactly, yet you have corrected two members
...AFTER they initiated the criticism themselves.
Then understand this - grow up.
Perhaps you should take your own advice, yes? I'm not here to throw petty insults. I'm not here to entertain you. Complain about me boring you, I don't really care. If you want to debate something, then debate it. Pick a topic, but I'm not going to play this childish game with you, despite how much you like putting on a show for everybody to see.
It wasn't theatrics - I went back on (without logging in) 4 or so days later and noticed the kind things from certain members such as Silas and the moderator - Andy - and realized I could make the time which I have recently had a fair bit of. If you are not here to throw petty insults then why are you doing just that - stop contradicting yourself its just getting unreal. I don't put on shows but if this is the only thing you believe to make your argument appear strong then fair enough, yell it till you are blue in the face but no one will hear you :) Goodbye.
Which is why you jump into a discussion that has nothing to do with you, so that you can launch accusations against me? I'm not buying it. The topic was about degrees, not whether you find other members of CreateDebate contemptible or dull. What you said wasn't even relevant to the debate.
You went out of your way to attack me. So it would be wise for you to quit now to save face while you still can. That is my advice for you.
You didn't give me any therefore there was nothing I took. Its cool that you continually feel the need to reply to me though, I am flattered :) Hey, got any friends? Just wondering 'cuz you seem like a total prick. LOL if you reply to this.
I thought the discussion was over? Why are you still responding? Or did you decide to keep responding after I suggested that you not respond, simply to be contrary?
Depends what you are talking about, I have not place to debate a particle physicist on the existence and behavior of sub atomic particles. I don't know where people get off thinking everyone's voice is equal and worthy in a discussion. Does a 4th grade class have an opinion on astrophysics? Possibly, but is it one worth anything, of course not.
“Sure. If there existed someone that has been doing open heart surgeries with a decent survival rate for at least ten years with no degree, schedule me in for surgery. A piece of paper makes no difference.” - Thewayitis
-Disputed-
It’s not the flimsy sheet of paper that is being referred to when someone says that they have a degree in this or that, it’s the fact that they contributed many years of studying the required material in order to gain the degree. It’s a sign of achievement and a feat of strength that shows a person’s dedication and desire to learn.
lol. I understand you're trying to de-value a degree by calling it a "piece of paper" but it’s more than just a piece of paper based on the value it holds. Money can be called just paper (and some other trace elements) but it’s the value that it holds which allows people to use in exchange for goods and services. I personally don’t like the idea of money having such value, but this doesn’t change the fact that it is regarded as legal tender for all debts public and private. You may not like the idea of a degree having value, but it does, even if you won’t acknowledge it.
If a person has a degree that pertains to a subject being discussed (say, a degree in US history while on the subject of the US Civil War) Then stating that he or she has that degree provides an audience with a certain bit of credibility to believe what he or she says is correct. Is it possible that he or she is mistaken? Yes. Is it possible they are lying about the degree? Certainly.
For someone who has a black belt in karate, saying so allows those around her to be aware of it. It doesn’t necessarily imply that she will win every fight someone starts with her, there’s a chance someone could beat her, also some people could lie about these things. But most people would be wise enough to take her word for it.
Within a debate these doubts do not matter, what matters is whether or not you have the winning argument regardless of your opponent having a certain credibility to what they say. If you attack a person’s credibility (when there is no obvious reason to deny its validity or relevance) you are not addressing the argument at hand, you are instead making an argument against a person, and this is not logical. If you have the winning argument, then your opponents mentioning of a degree becomes a moot point in itself without you having to point a finger directly at it.
It is nothing more than a flimsy piece of paper and this is why. Anybody that has enough money can buy one. Degrees are more often than not, paid for and not earned. Get your on-line degree here.
Certification and degrees aren't even worth the paper they are printed on. The educational system is broken. Disagree with the professor and you won't pass the class. You can be right, but your there to worship the words of someone that bought their right to teach you.
My grandpa is in the Ohio agriculture hall of fame for his contribution to agriculture. After all the hoopla, he was asked to pay the customary $10,000 fee to have his picture on the wall with everyone else. Not much of an honor to pay for a place in history. Colleges and universities still work on these same methods. Send them money and you become valued alumni. Send them enough and you can teach. Send them enough and you are staff.
If you are referring to some fake university or educational website that will literally print out a four year ‘degree,’ than I would have no other option than to agree with you. But if you are referring to a reputable university, can you please support your claim that a degree can be ‘bought,’ without actually earning it? I’m having trouble accepting that as it goes against my personal experience.
If a degree was more often than not, bought and not earned, than it would show when the individual gets a job in their specific field and doesn’t know the basics. It would be a waste of money on their part to do such a thing. Organizations on websites that offer the service of selling you what is essentially a fake degree are scams; they are ripping off the poor suckers who are dumb enough to believe it is that easy.
Although I agree that money should play no part in ones education what-so-ever, I find it hard to believe that it’s as easy as paying the tuition and getting a degree. I have paid thousands of dollars so far and my grades still depend on me passing tests and writing assignments as I see by my progress reports.
I also agree that a professor’s personal feelings should play no part in the education system. Given the way the system currently works with money, I would support an idea to make it illegal for professors to show any bias in their grading (and teaching for that matter). I’m not paying thousands of dollars, for example, to have some professor fail me because they or a family member of theirs is obese and I strongly dislike obesity. People should be graded on their ability, not personal issues that the professor has. I actually had to drop a class for this reason, and that is just plain sad.
Most of my professors have not been like this however, I would hardly call it a broken system for the piss poor performance of one man, which would be illogical for someone to do.
Thewayitis, I can’t help but wonder if you are pontificating on things you know practically nothing about. You don’t have to say, because after all it doesn’t matter, but do you have a degree in anything? Do you know the process it takes to acquire one first hand?
Do you actually believe that the rich earn their degree? Paris Hilton is a college graduate.
I wonder how much you know about how universities actually work? I'm talking about the inner workings; management, fund raising, hiring, etc. What goes on in the administrative office can easily be compared to politics in all regards. If the head of the Philosophy department wants to keep their job, they must donate part of their money back to the university and recruit others do to so.
Staff goes around boosting each others egos. Recently I attended my niece's graduation from college and the professor spent more time congratulating each other than they did the class. Then we had to move on to all the honorary degrees. Who do you think these go out to?
To reiterate: "if you are referring to a reputable university, can you please support your claim that a degree can be ‘bought,’ without actually earning it? I’m having trouble accepting that as it goes against my personal experience."
Yes I believe that the rich, just as anyone else, earn their degree. I will gladly accept correction, but I will need to see some kind of evidence before I can consider your claims as valid. Based on how differently people approach such things, it could be understandable why someone might think that it is all a scam and that a degree can be bought. However, because it goes against what I know so far, I can't accept your conspiracy theory without evidence.
I'll let you name a reputable university, since there are none. Find one that has never had a scandal of any kind. A look at their athletic department, professors dating students, etc; go ahead name a reputable university.
As far as I'm concerned, they're all reputable unless there is proof to show otherwise. If you make the claim that universities are scandalous, then the burden of providing proof to that claim is on you, not me.
I know that I am earning my degree. My grades depend on the amount of effort I put into it just as much as my classmates as seen in the varying marks. So your claim goes against my personal experience and that is what brings me doubt to its credibility and yours.
If there is people who ‘pay’ their way through college and don’t actually earn their degree, than it is them who are losing out in the long run. I admit that it is not so much the degree itself that is important, it is the knowledge one gains while studying the subjects in their degree program, the degree itself is the certificate that provides proof that a person has learned something, until a person has reason (and proof supporting that reason) to think otherwise, then a person’s degree has worth (maybe not to you personally, but to a society that can potentially benefit from the knowledge indicated by that degree).
No. Nor do I think doctors and teachers who have degrees are infallible. People make mistakes, and some people act out of spite. Such things are not demonstrations indicadent upon having a degree.
