<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know how the number of students compares to the number of spaces, but the Engineering majors do typically have more requirements that have to be taken in a particular order. I suppose if outside students were allowed there would be a risk people that missed the class wouldn’t be able to graduate on time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re allowed to take classes if it’s a requirement for the major, but I think you have to do it through a counselor.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I agree. And that’s why public universities should continue to offer Philosophy and the other “lofty” majors that you decried. A philosophy degree is the loftiest of the lofty when it comes to non-career degrees. It’s the antithesis of an Engineering, or Accounting, or Education degree or other major that prepares you for a specific job. It does indeed teach you to think and reason, but it gives you no specific skills. There is no paying job of Philosopher, or Thinker, or Reasoner that an entry-level job seeker with a BA in Philosophy can apply for.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>But that’s like saying there’s no job that a pre-health major can apply for since their BS’s are prep for med school, dental school, pharm school, or vet school. Many consider Philosophy to be a pre-law degree. Some people who feel a calling to religious life get philosophy degrees prior to going to seminary. </p>
<p>So, it’s not some kind of “lofty” major that has no purpose for preparing people for careers.</p>
<p>There are many great interdisciplinary majors offered as well, such a comparative human development at UChicago, philosophy, politics, and law at USC, or computing and the arts at UCSD. All very exciting, providing really interesting courses pulled together by the creative investigation of interesting problems. Graduates can do anything.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Okay, if not philosophy, then what are these “lofty” majors (your term) that public colleges should not be offering? Which majors educate “just for the sake of educating (or for the sake of nothing)?” (post 32).</p>
<p>We interrupt this squabble to bring you an important news bulletin: today Chancellor Yudof withdrew the proposal for tuition differentials depending on undergrad major. We return you to your normal programming.</p>
<p>(I haven’t seen the press release but I’d love it if it quoted Yudof, saying, “I was just playin’, messing with their minds, hoping to draw people into arguments just to see what kind of people they are and how they argue their case. Given the financial crisis besetting the UC system, I figured the academic equivalent of a food fight would release some tension and provide a little entertainment.”)</p>
<p>I think he ran the idea up the flagpole to see who’d salute. </p>
<p>Instead, everyone with a dog in the fight came and peed on the flagpole.</p>
<p>It wasn’t the worst idea I’d ever heard but I found it pretty unpalatable. Several of us who are UC-connected were talking about it over a church dinner last night…nobody thought it was a good idea…science prof, humanities prof, senior administrator, gadfly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I also think Birgenau’s idea of accepting more (rich) OOS’ers is the same flagpole idea. Trying to get the Legislature to react.</p>