Charles Murray: Should Everyone Go To College?

Should Everyone Go To College?

In "Are Too Many People Going to College?" by Charles Murray is not that too many people are attending college but that people are going for the wrong reasons. People ought to head off to college to become "capable and cultivated human beings" and get a liberal arts education, but should not wait until school is over to do so. You ought to know your aptitudes and shortcomings before picking a job just to get a degree in view of the amount of money you will make. Murray utilizes the electrician and the business manager scenario for a young male to demonstrate this point. The young man could be a successful electrician in light of the fact that he would be the best at what he does and that would secure professional stability. Then again turning into a business manager wouldn't be his best

advantage in light of the fact that he has interpersonal abilities and wouldn't be at the top of the market. I agree with this article because you need to do what is to your greatest advantage although money is very important, loving what you do and putting you best exertion into your work is more imperative to true success.
The whole essay contains a basic structure and is anything but difficult to take after. It is extremely long, yet utilizes a less difficult language structure and word usage to pass on the inside significance. The paper, despite the fact that it is split up by segment or "sections" such as “Liberal Education in College,” allows the reader to flow through the essay without losing focus. This structure attracts the gathering of people, who probably are either college students or about to be. This is portrayed on page 234 where Murray shows an understudy choosing to either head off to college or stay back and turn into an electrician. He portrays the understudy by his activities, demonstrating that the understudy had turned upward the wages of an electrician, cost for school, and sensible employer stability (Murray 234-235). His precise portrayal of the understudy and striking symbolism adequately put the gathering of people into his shoes. They see the youthful perspective understudy as a differentiation to his or her own perspectives. Things being what they are, the theoretical understudy is liable to profit on the off chance that he went to class instead of turn into an electrician because of the cosmically high educational cost today. He additionally will increase characteristic remunerates that could be higher than if he turned into an administrator. On account of this, Murray states that because of the best advantage of the understudies, their choice regardless of whether to head off to college ought not be looked down upon (Murray 236-238).
As a result of the solid examination of Murray's argument, there are numerous prominent illustrations of the counter-argument being introduced.

They end up being basically unsavory conclusions. For instance, Murray cites a primary counter-point that more individuals ought to get a liberal education through college. Murray consciously can't help contradicting this, saying, “More people should be getting the basics of a liberal education…the places to provide those basics are elementary and middle school,” (Murray 223). Likewise, he expresses that the larger part of individuals imagine that the motivation to attend a university is a result of the social standard of getting a BA will consequently secure a job. Murray states, "There has never been a period in history when individuals with abilities not taught in school have been at such request at such high pay as today, nor a period when the scope of jobs has been so wide… discovering the top notch talented work is hard," (Murray 236). By introducing the counter argument, Murray sets his point, saying that school is not for everyone, and social standards have changed the correct beliefs of

college.
All in all, Charles Murray is genuinely enticing all through his article. He gives exact illustrations, both genuine and hypothetical, states counter arguments that demonstrate his point, all in an easy to read, fundamentally solid paper. It really gives another look on the level headed discussion that has raged on for quite a long time about college participation in the United States. It indicates how one does not have to entirely need to hold fast to social standards with a specific end goal to have a renowned and effective profession.