To think you can be well educated without a degree?

[Birdylade]

I left school very young although I always did very well academically. I don't have a degree although almost everyone else in my family does and this makes me feel intellectually inferior. I have young DC's but spend a lot of time reading and have a real thirst for knowledge, just no time, or more importantly money, to do a degree.

I like to think I am well educated, albeit through self-education, but I find I do get judged for not having a degree. Is it unreasonable to consider myself well educated without a university degree?

You need to stop being a condescending, rude arrogant poster.

I don't understand what education means because I have a different opinion on it than you? Then how on earth have I managed 10 years as a student and several more as a teacher? Working in "education" which has a common accepted meaning. Have you heard of "the education sector"? Do you think that refers to people reading books at home, or do you think it has a commonly accepted meaning of those that work within educational establishments?

As I said, it open to interpretation, and different people can hold different views of what education precisely means. You can choose to barrel in with your "I am right, everyone else is wrong, everyone must listen to me and anyone with a different opinion is deemed too think to understand", but it just makes you look like a fool.
Or possibly a failed teacher or someone knocked back from Oxford and never got over it? Must be some reason for the giant chip on your arrogant shoulder.

Who cares what the exact definition of education is?

I think this thread illustrates very nicely why being highly educated is not always particularly interesting thing to be.

I'm sorry if I am being rude. I do think it is much ruder to tell a poster they can't be 'educated' because they've not been 'taught'.

I have to be clear: 'education' has a known etymology. I agree that etymology and definition are not the same, but the definition you gave is tautological - it defines the adjective with reference to the noun. So it's not actually useful - it doesn't support your point.

Do you honestly not see this?

I'm not - I think - someone with a chip on my shoulder, but I do feel very strongly that (as has been said on this thread), people can be very snobby about the value of formal education. You've chosen to use your education in order to tell them OP she's wrong, that she's not well educated. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But when you do that, and you show up the limitations in your own formal education ... do you really expect people not to pick you up on it?

belgo - I only care because someone has decided to tell the OP she can't be educated because they think 'education' can only mean 'having been taught'.

I don't understand the attraction of doing that - none of us knows the OP (AFAIK) and she has said she feels upset at her family treating her as they do for her lack of a degree. No need to reinforce the snobbery she's encountered.

Other people managed to disagree with the OP without being patronizing about it.

I didn't tell her anything, I gave my opinion on the question asked, as is the point of this forum. For some reason you leapt on mine out of all the others and were exceedingly rude to me personally.

I am entitled to my opinion. I do not believe you need to be formally taught to be clever, knowledgeable, well-read, intelligent, or many other things. But I do personally think that education has a common meaning that implies institutions and formal learning. I came to formal education late in life and worked very hard. I was no less worthy or smart before hand than I am after, and as a teacher of mature students I am not snobby about formal education, rather just value it very highly, while also valuing other forms of learning.

I do not see why I should apologise for my personal opinion. And actually that definition does support my point, just not in the way you think I meant it.

And rather hypocritical for you to call anyone else patronising. (That's with an S, unless you are american?)

I didn't ask you to apologize, and I addressed my criticisms to the contents of your post. If you have a problem with that, it's not my issue.

You come across as very snobby about education, with your assumption that I must have a 'chip on my shoulder' simply because I corrected you when you were wrong. I wasn't the only person to point it out, either.

Yes, of course one can be considered 'educated' - by which I mean intelligent, thoughtful, cultured, considerate, and even polite - without a degree.

And there are shedloads of people with degrees who lack those qualities, so I wouldn't judge someone on that particular piece of paper.

Just to be extra-controversial , I think my 12 year old is particularly well educated. She definitely doesn't have a degree. She doesn't even go to school.

She can tell you anything you wish to know about astronomy, chemistry or physics. She knows a lot about all sorts of other things too. More importantly, if she doesn't know something, she knows how to find out. She makes use of anyone around her who has expertise.

I don't think education is something that has to be done to you. I think it is at its best when it is something you do for yourself. Formal qualifications are a useful tool for proving to others that you have an education, but you don't need them as such to be educated, in my opinion.

Waits to be flamed .

I am not snobby at all about education, I merely have an opinion as asked by the op. Could you direct me to AIBU, since I appear to have wandered into "only posters that agree with OP may have an opinion"?

No-one is saying you can't have an opinion. You're blowing this out of proportion. All that I (and someone else who made the same point) did was to point out, briefly, that you'd made a minor error. It's not a huge deal. I pointed it out because it felt to me as if you were making a point against the OP based on an incorrect premise, and since that point might have made her feel worse, yes, I did want to correct it.

I've obviously hit a nerve and I'm sorry about that.

"And rather hypocritical for you to call anyone else patronising. (That's with an S, unless you are american?)" Oh dear, of dear, what have you done?

You'll like this Mickey

Depends who you ask, and both are in current use.

As with many words with a choice between "-ise" and "-ize", the "-ise" form is the most common in print in England: so "patronising" is OK. The Oxford English Dictionary, however, prefers the "-ize" form on etymological grounds (origin in Greek "-izein"), so "patronising" is also OK; some Oxford-educated people will tell you that it's the more educated version.

This difference turned up as a crucial clue in the Inspector Morse mystery The Ghost in the Machine. Morse, being Oxford-educated, came out with this "-ize = educated" factoid. I didn't go to Oxford, and think it's bilge.

Agree with many other posters you can be well educated without a degree.

You can be learned, well read, wise and intelligent if equipped with nothing beyond Primary education but your own interest and a library. A degree is just a qualification that proves you are educated.

See, who needs Oxbridge when you have the BBC? (Or is it ITV now?)

I love stuff like that though - people who are interested end up knowing all sorts of things and not always from the fanciest sources. I think it's true of everyone - it's just people with formal education tend more often toknow how to dress up what they know as if it all came from big books and academic sources.

*Btw, I had no clue of the 'ize' thing, and just can't spell for toffee.

I think the point of 'schooling' (and by that I mean all education that is formally taught within an institution) is to learn (a) skills that need to be imparted by a 'teacher' and (b) how to think. These two can then be used to become an autodidact.

The OP has reached that point and now educates herself. I have also reached that point (post Oxford FWIW) and am, as with the OP, now in charge of my own education. As far as I am concerned the OP and I have reached the same point and are both 'educated' despite having spent different amounts of time being 'schooled'.

I knew the ize thing was ok (educated by mn, you see ) but found that quote just to reassure myself I wasn't about to make a big tit of myself by just saying so.

MN is fabulous education.

I do live in Oxford (don't study there), so maybe they put something in the drinking water?

Of course YANBU. One can be poorly educated despite having received a top-notch education.

I like to mentally categorise (-ize) people as well read or not well read. By this I mean have they a curiousity and knowledge about a range of different things beyond their own domestic/social/work. Are they interested in learning about whole new areas? Is their 'general knowledge' good? Can they hold a vaguely informed conversation on loads of different topics. Do they retain information?

A person who is not well read may be an expert in their particular field but have no interest or knowledge in anything else.

I think the difference between 'educated' and 'well read' is probably greater than it ever has been.

My grandad was like Nancy66's. From a massive poor family, and had to work from a young age to help out- he won a scholarship (to the grammar school, I think? I'm not sure), but they couldn't afford the uniform and he didn't go. He was incredibly cultured and knowledgable though, because he made the effort to find things out.

My own formal education is not bad- degree, other bits and bobs of courses since- but most of my general knowledge just comes from being a huge reader and massively nosy. I smoked far too much pot at university to learn much there.

I am feeling incredibly empowered by this thread [bugrin] !!

I felt I was well educated without a degree, but I still went ahead and signed up with Open University to do a degree. I am no better educated now (although I read a lot of interesting stuff), but I do feel somehow as if I could be taken more seriously (no reason for this ... just in my head).

YABU. Why don't you do a degree and at the end you can come back and tell us all you never realised was waiting to be learned? Some people waste their time at university of course, but most people would say it takes your knowledge and abilities to a new level, in a broader and more abstract way than just learning skills to do a job.

BBQJuly - I would if I could afford it, unfortunately don't have a spare £27,000.... DH says he knows more 'facts' since his degree but has no better abilities, everyone else in my family remembers very little about what they learned in their degree, except for my cousin who now speaks Arabic because of her degree and my uncle who now lectures at Oxford in the subject he read.