You are on page 1of 4

Is It Bad to Not Go to

Jathniel Joaquin

It seems that an issue that now rises is if one should continue on with an education in a
university. With the rising costs of an education increasing more than one could afford, it forces
one to borrow money to pay off an education. These loans will become harder to pay off as the
interest of these loans increase and the workforce hinders the opportunity to pay off loans. Some
then other factors of university such as the amount of dedication to immerse one into a field. This
leads some to look into alternative work fields such as plumbing or construction which requires
minimal schooling and allows one to immediately work.
From a Kantian viewpoint, a person that decides to not further his studies due to financial
problems such as not having enough to continue in that field or not able to pay off borrowed
money would be morally correct. This is true because it would not be morally correct if one
would borrow money that could not be replaced as promised in the case of a person that takes
student loans. In both one's maxim and in a universal sense, by not going to colleg.
Another situation to take in consideration is if one decides to not go due to not desiring to
cope with the dedication needed to further one's education. If the person's maxim is that is better
to not further improve one's talent in a university and only dedicate himself to a mediocre labor
that allows him to have more leisure than needed, one would be morally bad. this is true because
if the person's maxim was expanded in a universal context, it would fail because the person is a
rational being and wills one's self to use their abilities. By not going to a university, one sees it as
good since it will develop one's abilities in a particular field. It is also reasonable to see that
universities to a person are needed to perfect one's skill just as the ordinary person is in need of
the philosopher to fine tune morality. If one sees that the person is apt to do a labor such as that

of a plumber or of a manual nature, then one would not be morally bad as he participates in the
universal law of one should improve his own abilities.
The Kantian viewpoint in this scenario focuses on the guarantee that the person refusing
going to college is doing it because they see a wrong in the way of payment despite having a
good will. It also focuses on the importance that the person has a good will in not going unlike a
person that does not want to deal with the responsibilities of work.
In a utilitarian perspective, there will be a priority on the outcome of an action where the
ultimate goal is achieving one's happiness regardless of the manner one achieves happiness
through. Since humans habitually strive to perfect his condition and it leads to happiness once it
is obtained, it is through the university that human could achieve happiness by learning how to
improve one's self. If one has financial hardship and is forced to take loans, one can conclude
that the person would be morally correct if one decided to ignore the costs and take loans to
obtain a higher good. Although debt is something one would and especially if one has problems
paying it off, it is a sacrifice that would help to promote happiness for others a well since
education is what can help eliminate the bad things in one's community.
In regards to an instance where college is not needed for a perfection of a skill, if the skill
is obtained by means of experience, then one would not need to go to a university. Fields that
require manual labor and see that they contribute to the community do not require an institution
as their work requires experience from previous work and apprenticeship. It contribute to learn a
new ability that compliments their established talent, but is not necessary to promote happiness.
For a person that decides not to go to college for the sake of not bearing with the
responsibilities that follow, although the person is avoiding what the person sees as

unpleasurable, , it is viewed as morally incorrect because it does not promote happiness for the
common good. This is because it is done with the result of one's personal end and avoiding the
improvement of one's abilities for service to the community. It also does not demonstrate the
higher quality of desires a person habitually strives for. One that sees the advantages of
improving one's abilities, capacity for service and bears the responsibilities of college, one
would be praised for their sacrifice. This is common among small communities or in rural areas
because that would mean another could possibly return to their community with more knowledge
that can be put towards a benefit. It also shows that if one achieves the end of improvement of
one's self for the community, the action would be seen as good since it helped obtain happiness
for the community.
Whether it is either Kantian or Utilitarian ethics, education is seen as intrinsically good.
Utilitarianism sees education as a tool to obtain happiness for the common good while
Kantianism sees education as a duty for a rational being as it is what is good. If one decides to
not attend a university, it does not constitute his actions as an intrinsically bad as long as they
strive to improve their abilities by other means. It depends on what the person determines as a
good if it reflects the universal or common perception what is good.