In recent years, the increasing cost of university education, alongside uncertain job prospects for graduates, has sparked a considerable debate about the true purpose of higher education. Some people argue that universities should eliminate arts subjects, like philosophy and history, in order to focus on vocational subjects. While I acknowledge importance of such practical subjects, I firmly believe that both approaches are equally significant for students.
On the one hand, it is undeniable that practical subjects, such as engineering, math, medicine and technology, offer an unshakable stability at work. In fast-growing century, graduates are under tremendous pressure since securing stable employment is difficult. Therefore, STEM subjects provide a guaranteed chance in the market since their influence stays demanded. For instance, many students who pursue degrees on engineering or medicine are more likely to find stable jobs after graduation, by contrast with those arts graduates who often face with unforeseen conditions.
However, eliminating arts subjects can increasingly affect on society, thereby causing detrimental consequences. Subjects like philosophy or history play a crucial role in developing critical thinking, shaping creativity and improving communication skills-competencies which are extensively appreciated among a range of professionals. For instance, in business environments, employees frequently face complex problems that require careful analysis and ethical judgement. Individuals with a background in philosophy are better equipped to approach such situations critically and make well-reasoned decisions. As a result, removing such destinations would be a huge loss of creativity.
In my opinion, the best solution of universities is keeping balance between practical and theoretical education.
In conclusion, although practical subjects are indispensable tools, the theoretical topics remain an important part of society.