SuqMadiq

I'd agree that there is sometimes a disconnect between what acadademics teach and the practical skills necessary for a job.

A liberal arts research institution in California would have a proportion of vocation skills to liberal arts for a BS something like 60% liberal arts vs 40% vocational skills, because they are not designed as vocational schools. I agree this is somewhat problematic. Cal. Tech., MIT, NYU's Tandon School, polytechnics, A & Ms, &c normally have the opposite proportion of 60% vocation vs 40% liberal arts.

The argument in favor of a 'liberal arts' undergraduate education is that the traditional focus of that is to prepare you to be a well-rounded person. This is not the purpose of IIT or IISC Bangalore. It's also - in my view - why Indians filling those US tech jobs are so boring and often seem to have no moral compass.

Sure, one can focus on skills for one's education, but the point of education is not really to teach what to think, but how to improve one's thinking processes and thereby one's knowledge.

Which is good practice because that is the kind of bullshit Zuckerburg and co have to do to justify their poison, extol all the woke values they are pretending to promote

Yes, as annoying as this is, it did - I argue - prepare you and others, along with the other liberal arts curricula - to be able to sustain substantial arguments for difficult social, philosophical and historical problems. You are arguably a better CEO than an IIT graduate.