As for students who aren't doing it for the job and just want to learn e.g. philosophy. The issue there is that there's nothing in undergrad arts that you can't learn on the internet so paying thousands of dollars for something you can get for free online seems silly to me. You get the university experience of course but I think the cost is just too high and that uni should be used primarily as an investment for the future.
I don't mean to sound confrontational here, but I genuinely don't understand why you've singled out arts degrees in this point. Firstly, I'm sure we can all agree that there is an
absurd amount of information on the internet, in all kinds of fields including arts, sciences, economics, politics, medicine, law, architecture, engineering etc. I would honestly not be surprised if in the next 10-20 years, public online courses grow substantially. It is certainly possible to find undergraduate and even postgraduate lecture notes on the internet from various universities.
I've just finished my science degree, and being the silly perennial first-year that I am, I bought textbooks for most of my subjects that I didn't end up making too much use of. But I genuinely believe that had I read and understood the content of these textbooks from front to back, I would have a knowledge base greater than that attained from attending lectures at university. From these points, I honestly think that most of the theory/information found in a degree CAN be found online or in textbooks.
Is it harder to learn material by yourself, without a leader in the field to guide you? Of course it is.
Can learning of theory be an acceptable substitute for lack of practical experience, such as running an experiment yourself, writing code, conversing with a native speaker of a language, cutting open a cadaver or speaking in front of actual lawyers? Of course not.
Is access to peer-reviewed literature important in allowing synthesis and generation of ideas? You bet!
The point of my previous paragraph is to show some of the benefits one gets by going to a university. In my opinion, these benefits apply as much to Arts students as students of other degrees.
____________________
Regarding the original criticisms of Arts degrees mentioned by the original poster (nerd1), I would like to offer the following:
1. Some degrees are more vocationally-oriented than others. That is to say, some degrees are designed to get you accredited and registered (or certainly take the first few steps in doing so) for a job. Usually in these conversations, a Bachelor of Arts (as well as a Bachelor of Science, and indeed, a Bachelor of Biomedicine) falls under the 'less-vocationally oriented' courses.
This does NOT mean that there aren't jobs for people who do take these courses. Firstly, there are jobs for people whose highest educational qualification is Year 12. Doing a university degree does not automatically exclude you from these. Secondly, there is the 'general job market', for all kinds of university graduates. Yes, you'll have to compete with lots of people, but jobs exist here too. These might not be the kinds of jobs people think of at first, but I feel it is important to mention these as they exist, and having a degree can be beneficial (or necessary) to get into them.
Now, for other jobs (perhaps those more closely related to what you studied at university), there may be further study/training/competition required in order to enter these jobs. I honestly do not know much as I did not do an Arts degree, but I imagine academia in arts requires further study. In that sense, a BA on its own might not get you a job straight up. My personal view on this is that it's important to
be aware of this before you start your degree. If you really know the risks involved, but still decide to go for something that you have a true passion in, I don't think anyone can fault you for that.
2. Regarding the other criticisms about arts degrees, I certainly do not think that "you learn nothing in arts" or "no hard or transferable skills are learnt in arts". Surviving university is not easy for everyone - consider the number of people who drop out, fail, suffer hardships, or take longer in their degree for whatever reason. Despite how cheesy it sounds, having a certificate showing that you qualified for a degree DOES mean that you have some measure of resilience, independence, original thought and synthesis, teamwork, work ethic, communication/presentation skills and an ability to apply what you have learnt. I certainly think arts degrees show this much in terms of transferable skills (and I'm sure there are more that I have not listed).
I would also like to raise a point that I know has been mentioned in the past. I would argue that it takes a different style of thinking and learning to do well in Arts compared to other degrees. While it's obviously NOT as simple as saying "different thought = good thought", I do believe that fostering these "Arts-oriented" ways of thought in capable students will lead to individuals who can bring their own views to the table, complementing the views of graduates from other degrees. I certainly would struggle in an Arts degree - but there are times when I wonder if taking one would lead to me being less confused about the world at large, as I mostly look at it with a 'formal logic' lens, which is not ideal in most cases.
_______________________________
In summary, I believe that it is very important to have some idea of employment prospects and pathways, and the likelihood of success of these, before committing to any degree. Regardless, I believe that ALL degrees confer benefits, and completion of a degree does say something about you as a person. While statistics show that on average, graduates from certain degrees 'repay' the government money invested in them better than others, I think there should always be a place for development of ideas and skills, and I think that the world needs people proficient in the skills developed in an Arts degree.
In response to the issue of market saturation, I think there should be greater regulation of the number of university places (but perhaps that's a conversation for a different thread). I personally see undertaking any degree as a calculated risk - who can guarantee that you're not going to fail and end up with debt to pay and no degree? On the other hand, who is to say that you can't be in the top X% that manage to make it into the career that they really like? That's why I say it's a calculated risk - I think you have to consider the various outcomes and their likelihoods (well, I'm a sciencey guy, I'm bound to say that ), and then decide if its worth the risk for you.
Honestly, I think people poke fun at every degree, and I don't think some good-natured ribbing is particularly harmful. It's not like engineers can't be in relationships, doctors can't have a good time, lawyers are all Lionel Hutz stereotypes etc. However, I would tend to disagree with the overall view that arts degrees are 'worthless', for the reasons mentioned above.