We should not define one's success by lifetime earnings but rather one's education

Parents Forum
1

<p>Why are parents so obsessed with defining success by lifetime earnings? They often say you can go to any school and still be "successful." Well obviously all the high-paying jobs out there can't go only to graduates of elite schools. I suggest we define success a little differently: *intellectual and personal enrichment as well as the ability to be happy and creative in our daily choices. *</p>

<p>I personally don't care about salary. I'd rather earn a meager living if it means I got topflight liberal arts education and enriched my mind/character through an incredibly accomplished and diverse set of peers. In the end, we all die anyway and when we become older, we realize what gives life meaning is not money but experiences and the ability to enjoy life. In that sense, the student who is ready to take advantage of everything a college has to offer will probably benefit the most from the top schools with the astounding wealth of resources they offer. It's simply an added bonus that they often happen to produce graduates with the highest salaries as well, but I personally couldn't care less.</p>

<p>I believe with this new definition of "success," the top universities list goes something like this:</p>

<p>Brown, Caltech, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, MIT, Northwestern, Penn, Princeton, Stanford, UChicago, WashU, Yale and so forth.</p>

<p>Some would say HYPS might add an extra degree of enrichment due to their sheer wealth, opportunities they offer, and extremely accomplished student bodies.</p>

<p>For LACs:
Amherst, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Swarthmore, Wellesley, Williams and so forth.</p>

2

<p>It seems that you’ve just taken top 20 colleges and re-shuffled the order based upon your criteria of success. If you drop the ordering of colleges are you really just saying that money isn’t everything? No argument here and I am a fan of liberal arts education. But, there are also many students that are passionate about STEM which does not often leave room for a well rounded liberal arts education. Nor can you actively participate in STEM projects with just a liberal arts degree.</p>

3

<p>Problem with that logic of not caring about money,is how would you pay for your children to attend most of the schools you listed? ;)</p>

4

<p>

</p>

<p>I’ve yet to speak to a person with a terminal disease or attend a funeral where success was measured by earning or education. Those are both small things compared to compassion, courage, mercy and, most of all, love.</p>

5

<p>“We should not define one’s success…”</p>

<p>You can stop there and save a lot of words.</p>

6

<p>Where I’m from most people define a person’s success by the contribution they make to the world. Your definition seems a bit, well…selfish.</p>

7

<p>

A few points -

  • Most likely you will care about salary unless you’re a trust fund kid or something. It’s a bit of a naive idealistic statement to imply you don’t care about the item that’ll, like it or not, have a large impact on your life. If you don’t have a reasonable salary you can generally forget about your kids attending the better public schools, private schools, boarding schools, and the majority of colleges. The term ‘reasonable’ in this context is relative and can’t be simply quantified.
  • The two aren’t mutually exclusive - it’s possible to get a good education and end up receiving a good salary. Some would even say that getting the good education helps one achieve a good salary (if that’s what they want).
  • I don’t view the general term ‘success’ as being formulaic driven based on the salary level and I don’t think most of the parents who post here also don’t have that view. I’ve seen that view posted here more by students than by parents. There are lots of people I’d term as ‘successful’ who don’t have large salaries. These people are successful because they’ve achieved what they wanted to achieve - pretty much the definition of success. Some examples -
    — an undersea photographer whose lecture I attended long ago (Stan Waterman) who quit being a professor to pursue his dreams of underwater photography and exposing his family to a different lifestyle in Tahiti. He achieved success in doing that although he also ended up winning emmys as a result.
    – park rangers at National Parks. Many of these people live on meager salaries but are doing exactly what they want and are enjoying life.
    – members of the clergy who generally have a low salary but are achieving what they want in helping people in the religious and social aspects of their lives.
    – some artists who, although not making much in the way of a salary, are achieving what they want through their art.
    – the list goes on and on.
  • While you’re interested in what you term a ‘top flight liberal arts education’ not everyone is interested in that. Many people would rather focus on engineering or science or other areas but they’re still enriching their minds (and the lives of others).
  • Finally, all of this can be achieved well outside of the limited number of colleges you listed which seems heavily biased to the HYPS… In fact, it can be achieved without attending college at all.</p>
8

<p>At 17, I wanted to escape the world. </p>

<p>At 21, I wanted to change it.</p>

<p>At 30, I wanted to own it.</p>

<p>Approaching 55, I’d just like to be able to drive 90 miles without having to stop to pee.</p>

9

<p>

Actually, I think they’re in alphabetical order.</p>

10

<p>I think it is beyond absurd to define your lifes’ success by the COLLEGE you attend. Your lifes’ success should be defined by your happiness in your career and in your life in general. College is 4 years of your life for undergrad work usually undertaken between the ages of 18-23. The notion that these four years are going to define your success is absurd. There are so many other factors that should be considered…career choice happiness, family life, community life, overall good mental health, social happiness. NONE of these things are based soley on your undergrad college choice. The reality is that once you are out of undergrad for a few years, no one is going to even ask you where you got your degree. They are more going to be looking at you, the person…and you should be doing the same.</p>

<p>Saying “I went to…‘top 20 school’ and therefore I will be happy for life”…like I said…beyond absurd.</p>

11

<p>I’m not saying I don’t care about money. It’s certainly very important but in my opinion only secondary. I don’t agree when parents say “Oh you’re fine even if you end up at Podunk U. I know so and so who got Cs at community college and eventually ended up making big bucks as a businessman” to make the point that one can be successful anywhere. True, those things happen, but it would be even better if we talked about the life enrichment of that person instead as the measure of his/her success despite his financial success.</p>

<p>Where you went to college doesn’t define you, I agree. However, the top schools with an abundance of resources are probably the best choice for an accomplished, intelligent person who wants exposure to other accomplished, intelligent peers and exposure to the best resources available to any undergraduate student. If you find those resources most abundant at community college, then I would say community college is the best choice, but in this world, it’s not. </p>

<p>College is only 4 years but it in many ways, it sets the tone for the rest of your life. It shapes your tastes, the way you think, interact with others, and handle responsibilities.</p>

12

<p>

Curm can summarize so succinctly!</p>

13

<p>Yep…and it doesn’t matter WHERE Curm went to college!</p>

14

<p>In a free enterprise society you earn about equal to the value you are able to create. If you have only the skills needed for a menial job you will earn a meager wage or salary. If, usually through education but occasionally through sheer hard work or luck, you have greater skills you can command a better wage or salary. </p>

<p>What’s wrong with that? </p>

<p>Why are the hand wringing about the pursuit of wealth? </p>

<p>Pursuing wealth does not preclude doing good deeds for one’s fellow man or even animals. Bill and Melissa Gates are extravagantly philantrapic and I am sure few would argue that they have had mispent lives. </p>

<p>I have a theory as to why some people feel the need to help others, which is fine, but then they go so far as to say or imply that if one doesn’t devote one’s life to such pursuits that one’s life was misspent. I call BS on the last part. There is nothing wrong with making good money over one’s life because frankly that represents the amount of value one created. </p>

<p>I don’t need to go to Africa to help people anyway. There are plenty of folks near me that need help. I don’t need to self actualize my life. I am secure in who I am. I don’t apologize for working hard and expecting to get paid commensurate to what I do. Neither should anyone else.</p>

15

<p>

</p>

<p>It sets the tone if you let it. If you are determined to be a life long learner, then college will have only been the beginning. Interesting and accomplished people have barely started with shaping their tastes, refining their thinking, and set as leader/worker at 22. Thank goodness for that. No one is more boring than a 40 year old who still thinks being a Harvard alum is an acceptable substitute for developing a personality. </p>

<p>Nor do I agree that being set among the green yards and brick buildings of Top Tier university is the best way to predict success in any area of life. The older you get, the less people care where anyone went to school and the more you must rely on yourself. My grandfather didn’t graduate from high school but he learned to work hard and stay on his toes by age 15 which served him very well in life. My FIL learned how to work hard and be trustworthy by growing up on a farm, not by attending Harvard.</p>

16

<p>

</p>

<p>Now someone has to dig up a recent study showing that 55 year old graduates of top 20 schools are able to drive 95 miles before having to pull over, while 55 year olds who attended schools ranked lower can only manage 82 miles. :D</p>

17

<p>I’ll chime in…I’m OVER 55 and I can drive at least 300 miles without a stop (assuming I haven’t had anything to drink for five days). I guess this is a testament to the fine qualify of my undergraduate university. BTW…I’ve also been very happy, and have had a wonderful career in my field (which coincidentally is in the same field in which I got my undergrad degree). I nominate my lower tier public university to honorary top 20 status!!</p>

18

<p>

</p>

<p>I read the whole thread and I couldn’t find where anyone said you must devote your life to helping others if you are to be considered successful. I don’t know if maybe my statement was misinterpreted when I wrote about your contribution to the world. Let me expand on what I meant:</p>

<p>I like the words you used “value one created”. Maybe you get paid $$$ for that value and maybe not, it is irrelevant. IMO a successful person uses the skills they have to make the world a better place then it was before they were born. For some people (with a particular skill set) that may mean going to Africa. For others it may mean taking an occasional pro bono case for a cause they believe in. For some it may mean just being an upbeat/positive/helpful person that it just a breath of fresh air to work with. For others it may mean being a parent that raises children that are compassionate human beings ( they might even end up at HYPMS).They might even end up making a lot of money. Hopefully they use their great education to make a difference in the world (and if they make $$ along the way, well good for them!)</p>

<p>I know plenty of very fine people who have contributed quite a bit to their communities and make “bank”. I see their success in the fact that they are able to look beyond themselves. I don’t think they help others because they are not secure with who they are. In fact, they are so secure in who they are that they are able to stop worrying about themselves and concentrate on the greater good. </p>

<p>The least successful people,IMO are those that are so focused on status, acquiring things, thinking about how others view them, etc… that they cant participate in life. I see this from those that are well off as well as from those that don’t have two nickels to rub together.</p>

19

<p>

I hardly think people who went to “lesser” schools (or none at all) can be said to have poor taste, think poorly, interact badly with others, or not handle responsibilities well as any sort of general statement. </p>

<p>As for contributing to society, etc. people often fail to appreciate the contributions made by the many, many unsung workers who are effectively at the bottom of the pyramid. The people who collect the garbage (who wants to do THAT?), pick and process your fruits and vegetables, sew your clothes in third world countries, all make valid and valuable contributions to the quality of life of the rest of us, whether they went to college or not. To me, it’s about giving more than you take, as best you are able.</p>

20

<p>Bwahaha! Thanks curm! :)</p>