> The notion of going it alone also completely disregards the necessities of non-STEM careers. Although you might be able to at least attempt learning a subject like physics or mechanical engineering in a vacuum (though I don't think you'd get very far), it's simply not possible to grow in writing, rhetoric, or many of the humanities, without a dedicated dialogue between authors and evaluators.
That's if your goal is to have an audience. Art was very successful in the West when Art was declared to exist for the sake of Art. It gave birth to a plethora of new techniques and artistic perspectives - many of which refined themselves in such a precise and beautiful way over time, that it almost seems to be a dance itself.
Regardless of whether you consider a painting of a square to be Art, or a musical composition of silence to be music, well... I think there are always new things to learn. It doesn't always require constant criticism. That kind of persistently critical culture can squash diversity, intelligence, and creativity before it even has the chance to grow. It's like an invisible judge - a line that you dare not cross, but can never see.
That's if your goal is to have an audience. Art was very successful in the West when Art was declared to exist for the sake of Art. It gave birth to a plethora of new techniques and artistic perspectives - many of which refined themselves in such a precise and beautiful way over time, that it almost seems to be a dance itself.
Regardless of whether you consider a painting of a square to be Art, or a musical composition of silence to be music, well... I think there are always new things to learn. It doesn't always require constant criticism. That kind of persistently critical culture can squash diversity, intelligence, and creativity before it even has the chance to grow. It's like an invisible judge - a line that you dare not cross, but can never see.