Let’s not make the same mistake as the UK. ‘Sensible’ degrees are overrated – The Irish Times

✕ Loaded Labels: The headline uses a comparative framing ('Let’s not make the same mistake as the UK') and includes a value-laden dismissal ('Sensible degrees are overrated') that oversimplifies the argument and injects opinion early. It positions the article as a polemic rather than a neutral exploration.

"Let’s not make the same mistake as the UK. ‘Sensible’ degrees are overrated – The Irish Times"

✕ Headline / Body Mismatch: The opening uses a historical analogy (Plato and poetry) to frame the debate, which is intellectually engaging but delays the core topic. This literary lead risks obscuring the article’s policy focus for stylistic effect.

"When the ancient Greek philosopher Plato imagined his ideal future city, he decided it had no place for poetry."

✕ Fear Appeal: The article uses emotionally resonant language ('anxious first week', 'catastrophic', 'not realising what you’ve got until it’s gone') to amplify concern, leaning into fear and nostalgia.

"So the utilitarian angle might play well politically, but its long-term trajectory could be catastrophic."

✕ Scare Quotes: Describing STEM fields as 'sensible' in scare quotes signals skepticism without argument, functioning as subtle editorial judgment.

"‘Sensible’ degrees are overrated"

✕ Glittering Generalities: The use of 'we all know' creates false consensus and bypasses argumentation, implying shared agreement on complex societal challenges.

"Yet we all know that the greatest challenges of our time – climate catastrophe, inflation, inequality and increasing polarisation and populism – are not challenges that can be solved with one approach alone."

✕ Official Source Bias: The author is a UK-based arts professor and writes from personal institutional experience, which lends credibility but also introduces a clear stake in the outcome. The article does not include voices supporting STEM prioritisation or utilitarian policy goals.

"As an arts professor in the United Kingdom, I write this from the vantage point of a higher education system where swathes of disciplines in the arts and humanities ... are closing or have been cut to the bone"

✓ Proper Attribution: The article cites a collective academic action (open letter with 2,000 signatories) to support its claim about narrowing priorities, which strengthens its argument through broad scholarly consensus.

"As an open letter to Research Ireland with more than 2,000 academic signatories makes clear, this narrowing of priorities hasn’t meant a focus on science per se, but is rather an emphasis on application."

✕ Moral Framing: The article frames the issue as a moral and civilizational choice ('ideal republic'), elevating it beyond policy debate into philosophical territory. This risks oversimplifying complex trade-offs.

"Ireland can build its own ideal republic – where poetry as well as plumbing takes pride of place."

✕ Narrative Framing: It uses the UK’s experience as a negative exemplar, framing Irish policy as a chance to avoid a known mistake. This comparative narrative shapes the entire argument.

"Ireland has a chance to learn from the UK’s mistakes."

✓ Contextualisation: The article provides strong historical and systemic context by referencing Plato, the UK’s higher education cuts, AI disruption, and long-term graduate outcomes. It situates current Irish policy debates within broader global trends.

"As an arts professor in the United Kingdom, I write this from the vantage point of a higher education system where swathes of disciplines in the arts and humanities – English, history, drama, art, music and, yes, the classics – are closing or have been cut to the bone in the face of the long governmental emphasis on science subjects."

✓ Contextualisation: It acknowledges counterarguments (e.g., bridge-building, curing cancer) and explains why they may be short-sighted, showing awareness of utilitarian perspectives even while critiquing them.

"Nobody can really argue with the benefits of bridge-building and curing cancer. But the trouble is, as AI makes clear, how can you really tell what the greatest good is going to be in the long term?"