BF2S Forums Best universities for majoring in philosophy?

JohnG@lt wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

don't listen to the nerd

Yes, philosophy degrees are largely regarded as 'useless.' That's because there's nothing that's directly related to it. Unless you get lucky and people like your writings and you become the next Plato.

But what you could do, is go to law school. I hear that a lot of law schools like getting philosophy majors, because they know how to think. Yeah, so do engineers etc but whatever. If you do well in school, and do all the required courses, and have some nice extracurrics or work experience then you can probably get a good law school slot. Same with med school (again, you've gotta take the required courses, so usually a fair bit of bio and chem).

Of course if that doesn't pan out then you're generally constrained to jobs that don't require specific degrees. Retail management (if you've got a knack for it though, you can go pretty high), law enforcement, be a commissioned officer in the military, etc.

edit: In regards to "useful majors":

Any kind of engineering
Any hard science, and math
Languages, especially Chinese (although really, to be marketable in Chinese you need to be fluent, which requires some time abroad)
Accounting
Finance

Those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Those are majors that will almost always (unless you have a horrible GPA) lead to a pretty good first job, directly related to what you studied.

When white people go away to college, they tend to study what are knowns as the Arts.  This includes actual Art, English, History, Classics, and Philosophy.  These can of course be broken down further into Film, Womyn’s Studies (yes the spelling is correct), Communications, Gender Studies, and so forth.  It is important to note that a high percentage of white people also get degrees in Political Science, which is pretty much like arts, and only seems to have the word “science” in it to make white people feel better about themselves.

These degrees enable white people to spend four yeas of their lives reading books, writing papers and feeling great about themselves.  It is a known fact that Arts students firmly believe that they are doing you/society a favor by not getting a job and reading Proust.  They use this to protest for reduced tuition, more money for the arts, and special reduced student rates on things like bus passes.

But what about the white people who study Science, Engineering or Business?  Unless they become doctors, they essentially lose white person status (and can only be regained by working at a non-profit).

So why would white people spend all that time studying and working to get into college if they are just going to read books that they might have read in their free time?  Because white people have it made.  They can take that degree and easily parlay it into a non profit job, an art gallery job, or work in publishing. If the pay is low, no problem, their parents will happily help out with rent until they magically start making six figures or non-magically turn 40.

White people can also take that degree and go to graduate school (future post) and eventually become a professor or adjunct professor where they will still require parental support.

If they are REALLY ambitious and need to make money, they can take that degree and go to Law School.

But the real reason white people need these degrees is so that they can sound smart at parties.  Of course it trickles down to making connections, getting hired, knowing rich people, and so forth.  But ultimately it all begins by saying “reading Henry James was the most rewarding part of undergrad.”

Using this to your advantage can be very difficult as attempts to talk about the books they skimmed while hungover can expose you.  It is best to say that you were a first generation college student and your parents demanded that you study math, chemistry, economics or computer science.  You had to read Joyce on your own.

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/02 … s-degrees/

androoz wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

androoz wrote:

Oh you're still in college? Didn't you forget some of the stuff you learned in high school since you were in the Army for a while?

Like how to tie my shoes? No. Most of the stuff you learn in college is different than what you were taught in high school. Whereas everything in high school builds on previous stuff you learned, college is different because you bounce around and every course is pretty much stand-alone. Sure, some prior knowledge is required but it's not off the wall crazy unless you're in Abstract Math.

Ah, what's the difference between a major in finance and economics?

JohnG@lt wrote:

androoz wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Like how to tie my shoes? No. Most of the stuff you learn in college is different than what you were taught in high school. Whereas everything in high school builds on previous stuff you learned, college is different because you bounce around and every course is pretty much stand-alone. Sure, some prior knowledge is required but it's not off the wall crazy unless you're in Abstract Math.

Ah, what's the difference between a major in finance and economics?

A degree in Finance is basically a micro-economics degree with a focus on how to evaluate securities, loans etc. A degree in Economics is generally macro focussed i.e. big picture stuff pertaining to full economies.

Last edited by androoz (2010-02-07 17:56:13)

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

wait

Androo aren't you 14? Go play video games and study for two more years, you don't have to worry about college yet.

Spark wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

wait

Androo aren't you 14? Go play video games and study for two more years, you don't have to worry about college yet.

i had already worked out what degree i wanted to do when i was 14

and i'm doing that degree now.

Spark wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Spark wrote:

i had already worked out what degree i wanted to do when i was 14

and i'm doing that degree now.

congrats, most kids ain't like you though

well maybe he's in the minority, i dunno

Spark wrote:

androoz wrote:

Spark wrote:

well maybe he's in the minority, i dunno

no he said you lol.

i dont think id be qualified for most majors, etc.

i meant in the minority as in the minority who actually know what they're doing very early

Last edited by DrunkFace (2010-02-07 19:37:27)

Uzique wrote:

galt in countriest hat still retain a modicum of class, 'high' classical degrees are still extremely marketable and desirable. they teach core skills and processes of intelligence and thinking that abstract or highly-vocational degrees do not. in america i dont think your arts courses are quite as well-taught or structured. over here the arts courses are designed to give you an overall understanding of the humanities, classical subjects and contemporary disciplines. you leave with a well-rounded view of many more things other than the analytical understanding of some dead renaissance poet. i think you're being purposefully ridiculous and naive, really. most politicians and big-businessmen over here graduated from an oxbridge-level institution with a degree in the arts/humanities/politics-philosophy-economics. purely theoretical disciplines.

you have to really ask yourself what you want from an 'education'; a way to make money or a way to open your eyes to new views and ideas. to say that you can develop that kinda of education as a hobby or individually is a bit silly i think; you're missing the value of an intelligentsia and thinking-people. society and culture needs that force. schools of philosophers and think-tanks. sure they may not contribute anything in a utilitarian or reductionist sense- but they influence everything afterwards. the stereotype of these people as rich, aristocratic people that can afford to pursue such disciplines is a little anachronistic. it isnt the 1800's. high-class education and access to information isnt only for the learned gentry and the young Lords on their Grand Tours. anyway, your stereotypes and generalizations really undermine and demean the impression you try to pretentiously give across on this board as some wizened and well-rounded intellectual. much like your views on islam and global warming. it just shows you to be a parrot-read textbook major thinking he knows something because he read it in a book the week before. you're smart in your discipline im sure but you don't really seem to have a good view of the 'big picture'. i hate to sound pretentious but there's more to life and more to defining your character than your degree and your pay-packet. i'd rather converse with someone that has read the classics and can understand key concepts of modern living philosophically than someone who has been trained to make money and be a success within the system. and who is a bigger success as a human being?

and dauntless, i wasnt aware you could get accepted into any credible institutions for a PhD/research spot without a master's degree as a minimum qualification. i was/am considering both, depending on whether or not i'll enter business/law school. im still trying to figure out whether i'd prefer a comfortable bourgeosie life centred around money and being a cog-in-the-machine, or whether i'd be happier living off a modest income with a better understanding of life's grand ideas. all in all i think we as a people, not just a generation, are pretty fucking inconsequential. pale blue dot. if im here for 100 years, the blink of a universal-eye, im not so sure i want to dedicate my entire being towards accruing a self-invented wealth for material signs of status that i just dont need. i wish more people would ask these questions about themselves before being ushered through the education/work system like sheep. people are institutionally instilled with this 'you must have a career ambition!' mindset, just so they become 'productive' in an economic sense. i think it's bullshit. a generation of marketing/advertising sharks and fiscal-tertiary sector workers and IT experts. im sure they're all driving nice cars but i dont really think the vast majority of them know shit or pose any interest or worth to our culture. im sure they could tell me about maslow's hierarchy of needs and the psychology of advertising and the tenets of friedman's laissez-faire market and the elasticity of price:demand... but when im an old man looking back at life and when im trying to be an inspiration and role-model to my children and grand-children... will that shit even fucking matter? will they be more impressed by my retirement home or by my wisdom? it's the pragmatic-capitalist outlook versus the intellectual-philosophical outlook. an age-old dichotomy. (ancient) civilization has always been driven by a vanguard of intellectuals though, whether or not the mass population trusted or embraced them. in the 20th/21st century we're seeing for the first time the driving of human advancement via the means of capital. and it's a retarding process. the military-industrial complexes stifle and control the rate of technological advancement. great human endeavours such as space exploration are prioritized according to capital and worth. even basic humanitarian causes such as social-care are being directed by fiscal demands. we've had since the 1500's and the renaissance/enlightenment to grant these basic fucking liberties. i just find capitalism and what it is doing to us as a global people quite a depressing and pessimistic process. rather nietzschean of me, i know, oh how profound!

vi veri universum vivus vici ! promotheus unbound ! these used to be the great underlying themes of civilization and human advancement. now we have... well, i despair, really.

nukchebi0 wrote:

While Uzique is rich already and consequently doesn't need to ever worry about not living a comfortable life, he does have a point that intellectualism, if pursued by those who desire to (and have the requisite mental abilities), can be a beneficial thing. I am usually of those who do not because they choose to do so, but because I don't think it is an appropriate academic endeavor for them (i.e., they are posers and pseuo-intellectuals.)