Theory of Knowledge: The Benefits of Being a Rich Learner

The last journal entry raised a different question for me: In the past, the rich were the only ones that could be educated because 1) they could afford the education and 2) the poor had to end their educations early in order to get jobs to earn money and support their families. This is still the case for some today in terms of university education. Does this mean that those who can learn for learning’s sake are those with the luxury of free time?

What I mean by this is that even now, most people will only receive their bachelor’s to embark on the career that they want. They only take the degree that is necessary. Not many people will go up to a PhD level degree because it is unnecessary and they cannot afford to continue studying when they can be earning money already.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs stipulates that in order to reach “self actualization”, all basic needs must first be met.

What I’m suggesting here is that “learning for learning’s sake” rests at the top of the pyramid in the “self actualization” portion and that money provides that means to climb all of the steps to reach that top of the needs hierarchy to achieve “self actualization”.

A person doesn’t necessarily need to be rich in order to be self actualized, but they need to be able to feed themselves and their family, have a secure job, a safe home, love and belonging, as well as a sense of self esteem before they get to a place where they can even consider gaining knowledge for the sake of it.

For me, I learn what I have to in order to succeed. In other words, I am reading criterion and doing only what is necessarily to fulfill them, I am learning the test rather than the subject. I am amassing knowledge in order to fulfill the basics that would allow me to get into university and in turn, get a secure job. I say things like, when I have time, I will go back and really learn French.

It’s perhaps easier for a rich person to want to learn at the high school level for the sake of their own understanding. This might not be true across the board, but I believe this to be true in a big proportion. What I mean is that they are not worried about achieve good grades which would lead to scholarship that would help pay for university. They might not necessarily be worried about getting a degree in a high earning field because they already have money, so they can get out and chase a field that they truly are passionate about regardless of the salary. They also don’t have to worry about repaying student loans.

This in contrast with a poor student or average income family student who not only will working hard for good grades in order to get scholarships, they also need a job that would eventually repay the student loans that they would need a good job. Even if they’re passion is in, say, art, they may choose a different field because being an artist is considered “impractical” where the pay isn’t as stable as that of an accountant.

Theory of Knowledge: “The Intrinsic Value of Learning”

It’s very easy for adults to tell kids that they should be learning for learning’s sake. There’s nothing wrong with learning for learning’s sake, but as with anything you have to look at the “What’s in it for me?” factor. I believe there will exist for me one day an endless quest for knowledge, and that quest is a good one. However, not many people can answer that “What’s in it for me?” question with “I’m learning for learning’s sake”.

The “WIIIFM?” for me is my future. I am not learning for the sake of knowledge, I am learning to get in to university, I’m learning to be able to get a good job, I’m learning to get good grade in order to achieve all of my goals. So no, I am not learning for the sake of learning. And no, I will not be able to do this until I have graduated from any sort of learning and have a stable job and a stable life before I begin my quest for knowledge for knowledge’s sake.

It doesn’t make the quest a bad one, it just make it one that I’m not yet ready for.