University should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student’s field of study.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position

Taking a variety of course in university has many merits. There are many people who success in their career due to their wide range of experience when they were in universities. For this reason, some people assert that university should require every student to take a variety of courses outside their field of study. I fundamentally agree with them insofar as with some qualifications. However, without adequate qualifications, this recommendation is too broad to hold true.

There are a lot of people whose diverse experiences in university make them prominent. David Trunk, one of the leading philosophers in 21th century, is definitely such one. He studied mathematics and computer science, and even no background in philosophy until he entered philosophy graduate school. However, through this experiences outside philosophy, which is his specialty, he developed a fundamental idea that our minds are over and above our physical ingredients. Rhee, one of leading philosopher of 20th century, is another example. He majored in philosophy, mathematics, and French at his college day, which makes him devise a new conceptual tool ‘coola bula’.

However, although there are many instances other than Trunk and Rhee, these are not for the assertion that all university student should take courses outside their major. First, their achievement is not from forced varieties but from spontaneous ones. In their college days, they could not have taken such diverse courses. It is their choices not systemic limitation that lead them to be outstanding in their fields. That is, if someone concludes from these examples that university should require students to take courses other than their major, then he/she commits a fallacy.
Another reason I disagree with the recommendation is that most people have no such high level of intellectual capacity. If I, not prominent just pedestrian as you are, take a course, say computer science, outside my major, philosophy. In this case, I could only take a lower level course designed for freshman, since I have no background knowledge on computer. True, for some people, this kind of lower level of knowledge would help. Yet, as a person who wish to have a specialty, it would be useless. In other words, it would be advantageous only for few people who have enough intellectual faculty to learn new things well and fast.

Also, the job market competition today is so competitive that even a deviation from our own field could be harmed our chances of getting a job. If I spend a lot of time for coding computer programs, then my chances of failure to be a tenure-track professor would be much greater. Richard Dawkins, one of the most famous scientists today, once wrote in his autobiography that he would be a successful researcher more than he really did if he had not spent a lot of time for coding programs. His regret shows that at least for some people focusing is more important than diversifying, which makes the recommendation false in general.

In sum, although there are many examples showing that diversified course experience in university is crucial for success in career, the recommendation that university should require all its student to take courses outside their major could not be endorsed. I showed it by examples that at least for some people variety of courses would be disadvantageous. (547 words)