The author presented at a Rutgers Business School conference on the future of business education, highlighting a fundamental schism within the field. He began by confirming that business schools universally teach students statistical inference and data-driven decision-making. However, the author argued that all statistical data originates from the past, implying that relying solely on it assumes the future will mirror the past. This contradicts the reality of the dynamic business world where things are constantly changing.Drawing on Aristotle's distinction, the author explained that while science is applicable to immutable phenomena, the volatile business environment falls into the category of things that can change. Business schools, by teaching methods appropriate for a static world, create a logical inconsistency for students. This leads students to either disregard their education or become flawed technocrats.The author suggested two paths for business schools: continuing with flawed logic and facing decline, or embracing Aristotle's distinction and teaching students to imagine and choose future possibilities. He observed that the academic community resisted his challenge, attacking his ideas rather than engaging with them. Therefore, the author advises prospective business students to adjust their expectations, noting that undergraduates gain concepts while MBAs face high opportunity costs and might consider skipping the degree. For employers, business schools offer value through their selective admissions process.