If you haven’t seen the Department of Education’s “financial value transparency and gainful-employment rule” in the news, this Higher Ed article will catch you up — in preparation for a parable.
There’s a lot to think about here. I have a doctorate in philosophy, and no one mentioned debt or gainful employment at any point in graduate career — unless you count an occasional discussion of how to attract the right sort of attention during an interview. I’m sure most of us have similar experiences, which might tempt us to take the position that the “transparency” that was good enough for me should be good enough for everyone. But let’s also reflect on the fact that higher ed in the US has become considerably more expensive since I was a student.
My point is that this is a conversation we need to have, particularly in community colleges. And here’s a parable to provoke discussion.
Gainful Intangibles
Suppose I offer you an opportunity to invest in a venture. Naturally, you’d expect some financial benefit; that’s how investment works. Suppose you ask what the plausible return might be on this investment. I point to all the intangibles that make this particular investment worthwhile: It’s a green investment, for instance, or it will provide jobs for members of a community, or it’s a socially conscious operation that you’d be helping to fund.
Those intangibles, presumably, are worth something to you, or you wouldn’t have been interested in this investment opportunity to begin with. But you still don’t know some very basic probabilities about your investment: Will you break even? Will you lose? Those “intangibles” are important to you, but the fact is — short of abandoning society — people have needs and money pays for needs.
I persist: Money isn’t everything, I assure you. There are things in life that are more important than just money. Of course, you respond. You’re sincere: You do recognize the value of a rich life, a life of connection and community, a life with larger horizons. But, you say, you’re asking me to stake a significant part being able to pursue that very future on this investment: Don’t I have a right to know — realistically — what the prospects are?
I still persist: There are things you will get from this investment that are simply worth more than any possible return on merely financial investment over the course of a lifetime. Just trust that you’ll see the value of these intangibles in years to come, and make the investment, now.
You start thinking hard about this. “What sort of thing do you mean?” you ask me. I say, “A richer, fuller life, for instance. And autonomy: Investing in these intangibles increases your self-understanding and autonomy.”
And then it strikes you: Autonomy.
“So, you’re asking me to make a decision in the absence of information about the financial return, because this investment is going to increase my autonomy?”
“Among other things, yes,” I reply, with a certain smugness.
“So you want me to sacrifice autonomy in the present and trust you that this sacrifice will end up increasing my autonomy later in life?”
