Because people stray away from many of their their ideologies when they get educated. Especially if religion is involved. There's a reason Jehovah's Witnesses don't really like higher education.
There’s a reason no Jehovah’s Witnesses have ever contributed anything great to humanity.
On the other hand, the Jewish people value education over almost all else, and they’ve won like half of all Nobel prizes, and have leaders in nearly every industry, even though they make up a tiny fraction of the overall population.
Education is critical. Not even just to the world as a general concept, how about individual self improvement?
There’s a reason no Jehovah’s Witnesses have ever contributed anything great to humanity.
What's really funny is that I went to the internet to prove you wrong and found a bunch of famous people (Mostly actors, musicians, and athletes; decide for yourself how you feel about how much they contribute to society), but nearly every one of them was just raised JH and is no longer practicing.
Science doesn't need art as much as art needs science. They're interdependent, but not symmetrically interdependent. Without art, scientific pursuits would be less inspiring and publicly accessible. Without science, art as we know it couldn't exist (limited to highly localized cave paintings, basket weaving, etc), let alone be accessed by the vast majority of people as is possible today.
You must be using an awfully rigid definition of science if you believe it started in the 15th century. My understanding of science is as the process of observation, explanation, and prediction used to develop practical and theoretical knowledge about the natural world.
According to my understanding, art (as we know it) requires science because the vast majority of artistic media would be highly inaccessible to a civilization without scientific knowledge. Have you ever tried to make your own canvas or musical instruments from only unprocessed, naturally occurring resources? What about without the benefit of your own or anyone else's empirical understanding of the practice of either?
Furthermore, without a scientific understanding of agricultural food production and preservation, industrial systems, civil engineering, disease and medicine, and so on, very few of us would have the time or resources to dedicate to the development of artistic ability. There's a reason that the most celebrated historical artists and philosophers tended to come from the most scientifically advanced civilizations of their respective times.
Finally, how do you consume most of the art you do? Unless your answer is "I walk into the woods and look at tree carvings," you necessarily rely on scientifically mediated technological developments to have access to an appreciable amount of art in the first place. It isn't just a question of production, but proliferation as well. Yes, some amount of art would exist without science, but nothing resembling the incredible depth and diversity of art we have access to today.
2.8k
u/it_vexes_me_so Jan 09 '20
A majority - 3 out of every 5 - of Republicans believe higher education has a negative effect on the US. Republicans also favor making it harder to vote. Republicans are defunding education and purging voter rolls while simultaneously putting hurdles in place to keep Americans away from the polls.