I'm under 20, and given the opportunity (had I known about the Thiel Fellowship before the application date, for instance), I likely would have applied. $100k to drop out of school and create the Next Big Thing? Hell yeah.
But there's more to it than that. 20 Under 20, it seems, is meant to address a fundamental flaw apparent in higher education, extricating from the "system" bright young minds before they've become too institutionalized. I can't help but wonder, though, if that's the best way to go about it.
My opinion is hardly as strong as Weisburg's, but if your goal is to address a problem within a system, I'm not confident that the best method is to tear it down and start from scratch. Thiel, however, seems to be doing this by proposing that students should address this issue by simply not attending.
Personally, I'm working on a project while going to school. Over the summer, I very well may decide not to come back. But I'm simply acting for my own benefit. I'm not trying to change a system.
Then again, maybe the whole thing just needs to be torn down.
I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
>but if your goal is to address a problem within a system, I'm not confident that the best method is to tear it down and start from scratch
What's a better method? Trying to work within the system in the hopes of improving it? You seriously think there's any hope of changing the ancient culture bubble of academia overnight?
He's not even attacking the system: he's offering motivated and talented people a very attractive alternative option.
Of course there is no hope of changing it overnight. There is no hope of rebuilding overnight either. I'm simply suggesting that you don't just rewrite the code before trying to make changes within.
Of course, it's not difficult to argue that many have tried, and failed, to make changes in the past, which is why I included that final sentence.
However, I do believe that he is implicitly attacking the system. This it's where I trend to agree with Weinberg; A man of Thiel's influence may just set a precedent.
Zach, I wouldn't call the limited scale on which Thiel is acting "tearing down the system"--more like creating a nascent alternate system, side-by-side with the existing one, for the few who can benefit from it.
There are already things like this; Deep Springs College certainly isn't for everyone, almost by definition, although most of those who attend it seem to do quite well.
Anyway, an escape hatch from the system isn't necessarily an attack on the system.
Comments
I'm under 20, and given the opportunity (had I known about the Thiel Fellowship before the application date, for instance), I likely would have applied. $100k to drop out of school and create the Next Big Thing? Hell yeah.
But there's more to it than that. 20 Under 20, it seems, is meant to address a fundamental flaw apparent in higher education, extricating from the "system" bright young minds before they've become too institutionalized. I can't help but wonder, though, if that's the best way to go about it.
My opinion is hardly as strong as Weisburg's, but if your goal is to address a problem within a system, I'm not confident that the best method is to tear it down and start from scratch. Thiel, however, seems to be doing this by proposing that students should address this issue by simply not attending.
Personally, I'm working on a project while going to school. Over the summer, I very well may decide not to come back. But I'm simply acting for my own benefit. I'm not trying to change a system.
Then again, maybe the whole thing just needs to be torn down.
I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
>but if your goal is to address a problem within a system, I'm not confident that the best method is to tear it down and start from scratch
What's a better method? Trying to work within the system in the hopes of improving it? You seriously think there's any hope of changing the ancient culture bubble of academia overnight?
He's not even attacking the system: he's offering motivated and talented people a very attractive alternative option.
Of course there is no hope of changing it overnight. There is no hope of rebuilding overnight either. I'm simply suggesting that you don't just rewrite the code before trying to make changes within.
Of course, it's not difficult to argue that many have tried, and failed, to make changes in the past, which is why I included that final sentence.
However, I do believe that he is implicitly attacking the system. This it's where I trend to agree with Weinberg; A man of Thiel's influence may just set a precedent.
Zach, I wouldn't call the limited scale on which Thiel is acting "tearing down the system"--more like creating a nascent alternate system, side-by-side with the existing one, for the few who can benefit from it.
There are already things like this; Deep Springs College certainly isn't for everyone, almost by definition, although most of those who attend it seem to do quite well.
Anyway, an escape hatch from the system isn't necessarily an attack on the system.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Springs_College