The level of education is essential because it brings satisfaction to our lives. From the articles I read, the topic of the debate between anti-intellectualism and professional education came up. The first article titled My Struggles Against Anti-Intellectualism was written by Paul Stoller. He was a professor of anthropology courses and had written 14 books of different types such as novels, ethnographies and memoirs. On the other hand, the other article entitled What's Wrong with Vocational School?, was written by Charles Murray on January 17, 2007 in the Wall Street Journal. He was an American political scientist and the very first to catch the attention of the publication in the year 1984. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essayThe first article's perspective shows the essential elements of achieving higher education to support anti-intellectualism. However, the view of the second article argues that obtaining a degree has nothing to do with a graduate and professional training. It is said that vocational school was a stepping stone for people to achieve their goal and mission in life. It has been said that it is the skills that really matter, and not between higher education and vocational education either. Paul Stoller argues in his article that it is important to combat anti-intellectualist struggles over the things we can do through education. The problem here is that we think that getting a higher education is the solution to success in life. So, we should avoid this thinking and continue to strive for our improvement. As the author states: “This is why, at present, it is important to combat anti-intellectualism in the public sphere and to support enlightened higher education, a space where mentors, to resume in the words of one of my readers, "do not teach students what to think but show them how to think - a skill that prepares them for a productive life in the world, a skill that moves us all forward" (Stoller 5) . In this statement, the author wants to enlighten the public's opinion on how anti-intellectualism can be fought. What is important here is that we believe in ourselves and what we can do to achieve our goal. The main point of Charle Murray's argument in the article was to understand that vocational training is not a low level of education. He wants to convince his audience and readers that there is nothing wrong with choosing the vocational course as a method of learning at university. As the author quoted in the article: “Most students find college life a lot of fun and that alone will keep the four-year institution redundant for a long time. But, properly understood, college is suitable for a small minority of young adults—perhaps even for a minority of people with high enough IQs to be able to do college-level work” (Murray 2007). In this statement, the problem would be thinking and being degraded by the four-year institution and other organizations. From this statement, the author wants to demonstrate the relevance of a professional course which still allows one to carry out college-level work. However, Murray wants to make his point that taking a professional course does not stop a person's learning once you have the persistence to learn and achieve what you want to be. In conclusion, there is no difference with higher education and.