What is the true value of a science degree in today's society?

[JaredJames]

I think that science has not integrated itself with liberal arts yet.

From the above, science was part of liberal arts.

So it's 'coming apart' not waiting to integrate.

 

[russ_watters]

Same with the overall employment rate for ANY phd, including liberal arts. I myself am not unemployed.

The point is that people don't get jobs in the field of their degree.

I'm not sure if that's true or not (doesn't seem like it would be), but with a median salary of >$100k, I would tend to doubt that many are bartenders.

 

[Energystrom]

I wonder if most of the people who are posting even understand what the "liberal arts" are. Everybody I've seen thus far seems to mostly bash cinema, artwork, etc, which only tangentially constitute the liberal arts. Most of these belong solidly in the realm of the "fine arts," an entirely different realm of discussion.

 

[ParticleGrl]

I'm not sure if that's true or not (doesn't seem like it would be), but with a median salary of >$100k, I would tend to doubt that many are bartenders.

The spread is huge, so the median isn't that great a judge. Also, for physicist, I think the median is something like 95k. With my bartender's salary+tips I make more than the bottom 10% of physicists, and I just got my degree this year (and the data excludes postdocs. I expect I make more than most postdocs). Which is why I'm bartending and not an adjunct prof.

Science degrees are definitely employable, but most people who get the degree won't get a job in science. Just like liberal arts degrees- getting a degree in history or fine art doesn't mean you work in history or fine-art. There is a reason the APS focuses on how flexible the degree is ("physics graduates are well trained to do anything!") and not on the great careers in physics.

The point being you can't judge a degrees "worth" by the job you end up with. Or if you do, nearly all degrees end up looking like a waste of time.