« Non Sequiturs | Main | LDS Test Is Necessary, Not Sufficient »

January 05, 2008

Comments

Yes, this is the same sort of thing I was trying to say yesterday. When you give away honors to people who did not earn then you degrade the honor.

When you toss out titles like Hitler to people who are no where close to Hitler you soften the title and are doing Hitler a favor.

I disagree. Sometimes, workplace or real-life experience is the equivalent of a degree, but only after a substantial time. A subject-matter expert can have as much or more knowledge of an endeavor or practice as one who has only studied, but not had as much field experience.

Perry,

Probably it would be better to read the article above, acknoledging that he is not speaking about the rare instances where life experience in a field gives a person equal knowledge to a degree. However, I think Steve is referring to the high number of bogus degrees given to people who probably in all honesty, could not beat out even an initiate in their honorary degree field....they are often political moves and not indicative of having achieved a real proficiency.....

If Chesterton said something like that, he would be wrong. An Honorary Degree is just that Honorary. The person didn't do the educational script to achieve a degree--that is understood--that is why it is H-O-N-O-R-A-R-Y. If the institution feels that someone is deserving of an honor--whether or not you or I agree with the person--this is the honor that they choose to place on the person, and, oh by the way, their perogative. It is a cheap shot to blast their honors, simply because we disagree with the person's ideas. To attack a person's honors, given by someone else, simply based on our own opinions is simply another way of sliding into hatered (cloaked in arogance) and thereby dishonoring yourself.

Nice use of sarcasm to completely avoid one half of the argument!

Did not realize evaluating whether these honorary degrees have becomed watered down and mostly unworthy of respect was attacking individuals. Thought we were simply evaluating something.

Try to look at it this way, you are angry because you think Steve was lambasting every individual who ever received an honorary degree. I think you are wrong. He is simply saying that he thinks that honorary degrees do not mean that a person is worthy of respect in that field nor honor as if he/she were a great person.

So basically, no one is being attacked but we are evaluating whether we ought to just accept that someone is woorth listening to just because of a honorary degree. If you read his example from Chesterton, it makes perfect sense.

Brad

The comments to this entry are closed.