Let me bring my personal perspective. In Europe, where I am from and where I did my studies, we entered university direct to major and got a thorough education in this major. All other reading for fun or personal education or culture was done outside school, in our (significant) spare time and according to everybody’s interests, without the need to pay 70+k per year. The Europeans I know are no less curious, informed, and interesting to talk to even if they did not study the ancient philosophers in depth. The college years were ones of my happiest, and I don’t remember anybody stressing very much or crying ever, except because they broke up with their boyfriend or girlfriend. Despite this lack of stress and overwork, my classmates came out extremely well prepared in their (STEM) fields and are all very successful here in the US, including in academia.
Based on the CS example upthread, UChicago requires their students to pursue a more in-depth curriculum in subjects that are not of prime interest to its students (STEM classes for Humanities and Humanities classes for STEM majors) at the expense of more thorough and/or professional preparation in the subject or general area they actually want to study. I don’t understand how this is a good thing. It seems to me that my son, who likes to learn but also likes to sleep and socialize like most 18-yr olds, is much better attending Stanford where he was accepted REA in December. Despite the duck syndrome, Stanford seems a little more balanced.