Summary Of David Foster Wallace's Kenyon Commencement Speech

Gerald Graff’s argument on how educational systems are missing a great opportunity to tap into “street smarts” and focus them into a path of academic work is indeed convincing (Graff, 198). After all, anyone who’s been through the American educational system knows odds are often stacked against the “street smarts.” This is especially true in english classes, where one is often required to read boring and somewhat heartless books like, 1984, Beowulf, and the majority of Shakespeare’s classics. This is not to say these books are bad or shouldn’t be read during one’s schooling years, instead, the problem is one of apathy. For instance, in my high school years I never even remotely liked to read books Othello, but I loved to read magazines and

Ever wanted to throw down that textbook and read something enjoyable for once? Well, go ahead! Chunk that dull textbook out a window and pick up a comic; it will be more beneficial to your education than you think. The skills and values that liberally educated people should posses can vary from different views, yet the list of ten qualities that William Cronon created in his article, “’Only Connect…’ The Goals of a Liberal Education”(1998), is an inspirational goal for the liberally educated. Cronon’s list of qualities includes solving problems and puzzles, empowering others, and understanding how to get stuff done in the world. However, as I read through Cronon’s list, I could not come up with one person who had all ten qualities of a liberally

David Foster Wallace is an American writer. He spoke at the Kenyon Commencement Address in 2005, where he gave a speech to the graduating class of the year. David tells the graduates of Kenyon College what the true meaning of a liberal arts degree is, and how they should go about finding it. David Foster Wallace’s appeals to credibility, emotion and logical reasoning in his speech – “This Is Water” – to strengthen the idea that the meaning of education is learning how and what to think, independently.

Recently, many have begun to attack and degrade higher education in the United States. In the book How College Works, authors Daniel Chambliss and Christopher Takacs claim, “As state support has eroded, and as more students attend college in an increasingly desperate attempt to find viable jobs, the price to students of attending an institution of higher education has gone up, especially at more selective institutions” (172). So is college even worth it? Caroline Bird’s excerpt from her book Case Against College “Where College Fails Us” is an adequately written article that agrees with those who question whether college is a good investment. Bird argues that although some students would benefit from college and succeed, many fall short, wasting

Clear, concise, and cohesive: all necessities of an argument. Matthew Sanders, a college professor at the University of Utah, writes in his online bio that he enjoys analyzing the ways of teaching and learning, which is exactly what Sanders does in his book. In Matthew L, Sanders’ book Becoming a Learner: Realizing the Opportunity of Education he argues that college is meant to develop a person into a greater being not to teach them job skills. To develop Sanders’ claim, learning is more than just retaining facts, he correctly aligns his rhetorical situation and uses elements of generative and persuasive arguments. These techniques can include new angles, appeals, storytelling, and many other strategies to influence its readers

In Charles Murray’s essay “Are Too Many People Going to College,” he believes that the concept of college has changed over the years. According to him, a four-year college is no longer as necessary as it was when it was first created because most jobs requires more on job training. He also adds to his reasoning by mentioning that because of the advancement of internet, physical libraries and the physical proximity of student and teachers is less important. Because of the changes he noticed he believes that people should go to college but not for liberal education. He makes the claim that the basic core knowledge of liberal education should be learned in elementary and middle school and that only people with high academic abilities should be encouraged to go to college. He finishes his argument by saying that instead of liberal education, most people would be better if they focus on career education in college. While I agree with Murray’s idea that people would benefit from getting a liberal education before college, I disagree with his statement that liberal education is not needed in college. Due to the wide range of knowledge a liberal education provides it can help a person become more adaptable to the constant change and demand of the job market, allow that person to have an advantage over another, and ultimately help a person figure out what they feel more comfortable doing in

The general argument made by author Charles Murray in his article, “Are too many people go to college,” is that the college is not necessary for everyone. More specifically, the Murray argues that students who went to school should have learned the core knowledge they will learn in the college. He writes, “ K-8 are the right years to teach the core knowledge, and the effort should get off to a running start in elementary school” (236). In this passage, Murray is suggesting that start teaching the core knowledge in elementary school until high school is better than to spend money and more time to the college. It is not important to go to college. In my opinion, I agree with Murray’s claim that four year college is not worth, job satisfaction for intrinsic reward, and the dark side of the Bachelor's degree.

Taking a skills training approach, I train my clients in self-hypnosis, what are essentially self-help techniques. The techniques used are based on validated research findings, which reveal that problems or disturbances are consequences of destructive and problematic forms of self-hypnosis. Self hypnosis is that internal chattering or self-talk which we all experience in our minds. It can be referred to in a number of ways including cognitions, autosuggestion, self-talk, self-suggestion, self-statements, self-instructions, automatic thoughts etc.

In Stephen Batchelor’s book, Buddhism without Beliefs: A Contemporary Guide to Awakening he goes into depth about the idea that Buddhism is not a religion or something to believe in, but rather a mindset that is a way of living with a course of action. Throughout the book he gives examples and tells stories to defend the idea that Buddhism is more than just something to believe in, but it is a way of living.

As a college student who is currently spending thousands of dollars to further my education and achieve a career goal, it was, at first, disheartening to read Caroline Bird’s essay “College is a Waste of Time and Money”. However, after thoroughly examining her points, I now see that her essay is illogical. In her piece “College is a Waste of Time and Money”, Caroline Bird argues against the idea that “college is the best place for all high-school graduates” (1); in other words, college isn’t for everyone. Throughout her writing, Bird supplies her readers with evidence that explains how, for some individuals, college is a waste of not only time and money, but of intellectual effort, as well. It wasn’t until after reading this piece several times that I began encountering flaws within her reasoning. Although I agree with Bird that college is a waste of all these for some students, I also believe that Bird does not provide strong enough evidence to persuade her readers into thinking this.

A child does not typically think about their lives ahead. Although they may not think about it, it is still there. Life ahead means getting a job to make money for everything else and if one wants a good job in the future, then college is the best option. College education is worth it because it makes a person better and more educated, it is not as expensive as some think, and college pays for itself once there is a good job to pay for it.

Going to college for many students is just a normal part of life. It is what will enable them to get an education that eventually will lead to get a well-paid job and the resources and the status to live a comfortable life. But for college professor, Andrew Delbanco, the American college has a higher purpose. In the article “College at Risk”, Delbanco states that colleges should be promoting critical thinking among students, through knowledge of the past and the interaction with each other; as well as, help them discover their talents and passions and figure out what they want to do in life. This type of education is called liberal arts and for Delbanco, it represents the ideal education. However, the high cost of receiving an education and the competitive labor market is making very hard for student to obtain a liberal art education.

In Charles Murray’s article, “Down With the Four-Year College Degree”, he discusses how he believes the four year degree is ruining college education. Murray exemplifies the ludicrousness of the four year degree when he says:

The most beneficial thing in life is to study something that interests you. When students are choosing what college to further their studies they consider: the cost, the social status of the school, and the programs the college carries. Professor Mark Edmunson gives his message on what students should consider in his article "Who Are You and What Are You Doing Here?", published on August 22nd 2011 in Issue 74 in The Oxford American. This essay is about Edmundson's viewpoint on education and that it is hard to get one. But if you do something you enjoy doing and work hard at it you will become successful. The target audience of this piece is the incoming class of freshman going into college. The message that Edmundson provides to the reader is how much positive power self-reliance has on a person. Edmundson explains how to become self-reliant: you need to follow your passion in what you want to study, fight against the institution to earn a good education, and to focus on the important things rather than having fun.

In chapter three “In the defense of a Liberal Education” author Fareed Zakaria opens up what he believes to be “central virtue of liberal education”(72). He writes that it teaches one how to think critically and clearly. He explains that thinking is the stronger advantage one could have in writing well. Before writing it helps first people to think in a critical sense so work should be using simple language in a well comprehendible way. Another part Zakaria mentions the importance of communication. The influence you can make on other people by tremendous power in pours waving skills for good or bad in expressing yourself clearly in speech. Last but not least he talks about the value of a liberal education in learning to learn. It