Anyone Majored in Philosophy?

[saymyname]

Originally posted by: fitzov

I wish someone could find some stats on what philosophers do. What jobs do they find percentage wise that use their education? Is your girlfriend interested in any of them? A philosphy degree is basically the bottom of the barrel when it comes to getting a liberal arts degree. It's almost like committing career suicide and just admitting that you're getting a degree in general education. She's going to have to get a job that doesn't care what degree you have.

I can tell you that roughly 75% are professors, and the rest are in AI or working for non-profits or think-tanks. Bottom of the barrel? Maybe if your're an undergrad who doesn't want to synthesize or analyze ideas, but I would say someone who is highly skilled in logic would be an asset to any corporation.

So 3/4 have to teach Philosophy. Out of those some are going to be at a community college and only the top %ile will be teaching at a major university.

Then the top 25%, who make it outside of academia, can work for a non-profit or a think-tank? Where are you getting those numbers?

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: fitzov

I wish someone could find some stats on what philosophers do. What jobs do they find percentage wise that use their education? Is your girlfriend interested in any of them? A philosphy degree is basically the bottom of the barrel when it comes to getting a liberal arts degree. It's almost like committing career suicide and just admitting that you're getting a degree in general education. She's going to have to get a job that doesn't care what degree you have.

I can tell you that roughly 75% are professors, and the rest are in AI or working for non-profits or think-tanks. Bottom of the barrel? Maybe if your're an undergrad who doesn't want to synthesize or analyze ideas, but I would say someone who is highly skilled in logic would be an asset to any corporation.

So 3/4 have to teach Philosophy. Out of those some are going to be at a community college and only the top %ile will be teaching at a major university.

Then the top 25%, who make it outside of academia, can work for a non-profit or a think-tank? Where are you getting those numbers?

The American Philosophical Association's last survey.

It's from ten years ago, but I doubt things have changed all that much

http://www.apa.udel.edu/apa/profession/what.html

 

[gotsmack]

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: fitzov

I wish someone could find some stats on what philosophers do. What jobs do they find percentage wise that use their education? Is your girlfriend interested in any of them? A philosphy degree is basically the bottom of the barrel when it comes to getting a liberal arts degree. It's almost like committing career suicide and just admitting that you're getting a degree in general education. She's going to have to get a job that doesn't care what degree you have.

I can tell you that roughly 75% are professors, and the rest are in AI or working for non-profits or think-tanks. Bottom of the barrel? Maybe if your're an undergrad who doesn't want to synthesize or analyze ideas, but I would say someone who is highly skilled in logic would be an asset to any corporation.

So 3/4 have to teach Philosophy. Out of those some are going to be at a community college and only the top %ile will be teaching at a major university.

Then the top 25%, who make it outside of academia, can work for a non-profit or a think-tank? Where are you getting those numbers?

You can see the numbers at your school's career services or you can ask the chair of the Philosophy department

 

[saymyname]

According to the National Research Council data for 1995, the last year for which data are available:

* 84.1% of the 8300 Philosophy Ph.D.s surveyed were employed full-time
* 7.1% were retired
* 6.5% were employed part-time, and
* 2.3% were unemployed

* Of the 7500 with full-time employment
o 79.7% worked in an educational institution
+ 69.7% in a four-year college or university
+ 4.4% in a two year college
+ 3.9% in a university affiliated research institute
+ 1.4% in an elementary or secondary school, and
+ 0.3% in another sort of educational institution
o 6.9% worked for a private company
o 4.4% were self-employed
o 4.6% worked for a non-profit, and
o 4.1% worked for government

 

[saymyname]

People who held Philosophy Ph.D.?s comprised 7% of all those who held humanities Ph.D.?s in the U.S. in 1995, approximately 8300 out of a total of 113,700.

Among all the fields in the humanities ? History, Art History, Music, Philosophy, English/American Language/Literature, Classics, Modern Language/Literature and Other (including Linguistics, American Studies, etc.) ? Philosophy was the most disproportionately male. Of the 8300 Ph.D.?s, 82.6% were male and 17.4% female. The average for all fields was 64.6% male and 35.4% female. This average reflects the fact that Art History was predominantly female (58.6%), but the closest to Philosophy was History, which was 78.7% male.

Far more women than men with Philosophy Ph.D.?s were employed part-time. Of men, 94.4% were employed full-time and 4.6% part-time; of women, 79.4% were employed full-time and 19.2% part-time. This sort of disparity was present, though somewhat less pronounced in other fields. On average, 92.1% of male Ph.D.?s in the humanities are employed full-time as compared to 84.4% of female Ph.D.?s, while 6.6% of male Ph.D.?s are employed part-time as compared to 12.7% of female Ph.D.?s.

Philosophy Ph.D.?s who are employed in the academy are more likely to be tenured than those in other fields of the humanities. Of the 5900 Philosophy Ph.D.?s who are academically employed, 66.4% are tenured. The average for all fields is 61%.

 

[saymyname]

This is interesting

http://money.cnn.com/2000/10/13/career/q_degreephilosophy/

"A bachelor's degree in philosophy is very good preparation for law school since the kinds of skills it teaches are quite closely related," said Richard Bett, acting executive director of the American Philosophical Association and a professor of philosophy at Johns Hopkins University. "Beyond that, there's no real recognized career track. It gives you a range of abilities that is quite unusual."

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: Babbles
I think she needs to study what makes her happy. Yes, she will eventually have to find a job when she graduates but I think if she is really passionate enough in her philosophical studies she will be able to find a job somewhere.

You have to see things from an employers point of view.

No, you don't. YOU feel you need to see things from an employers point of view. Good for you. Others feel differently and they're just as entitled to that view as you are to yours.

You're in your own little world if you think the job market will cater to you. I think everyone should maximize their potential.

I don't think it will cater to me at all. I DON'T GIVE ONE LITTLE RAT TURD ABOUT THE JOB MARKET, CAREERS, MONEY, OR ANYTHING RELATED. Why is this so impossible for people to understand. Some people aren't interested in those things.

 

[saymyname]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: Babbles
I think she needs to study what makes her happy. Yes, she will eventually have to find a job when she graduates but I think if she is really passionate enough in her philosophical studies she will be able to find a job somewhere.

You have to see things from an employers point of view.

No, you don't. YOU feel you need to see things from an employers point of view. Good for you. Others feel differently and they're just as entitled to that view as you are to yours.

You're in your own little world if you think the job market will cater to you. I think everyone should maximize their potential.

I don't think it will cater to me at all. I DON'T GIVE ONE LITTLE RAT TURD ABOUT THE JOB MARKET, CAREERS, MONEY, OR ANYTHING RELATED. Why is this so impossible for people to understand. Some people aren't interested in those things.

Yes, and most of those people are a burden on our society.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: Babbles
I think she needs to study what makes her happy. Yes, she will eventually have to find a job when she graduates but I think if she is really passionate enough in her philosophical studies she will be able to find a job somewhere.

You have to see things from an employers point of view.

No, you don't. YOU feel you need to see things from an employers point of view. Good for you. Others feel differently and they're just as entitled to that view as you are to yours.

You're in your own little world if you think the job market will cater to you. I think everyone should maximize their potential.

I don't think it will cater to me at all. I DON'T GIVE ONE LITTLE RAT TURD ABOUT THE JOB MARKET, CAREERS, MONEY, OR ANYTHING RELATED. Why is this so impossible for people to understand. Some people aren't interested in those things.

Yes, and most of those people are a burden on our society.

Again, we disagree. And could go into the argument but it wouldn't get anywhere because i've found most often people with your mindset are unwilling to accept alternatvie viewpoints.

 

[saymyname]

I'm sure there are many countries where you can live without a job or money. Here though our taxes would be used to support you and I'm just not a fan of that.

I'm not saying you have to be a workaholic. I'm saying you can't be a burden on society. You should try to contribute to it.

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: saymyname
I'm sure there are many countries where you can live without a job or money. Here though our taxes would be used to support you and I'm just not a fan of that.

I'm not saying you have to be a workaholic. I'm saying you can't be a burden on society. You should try to contribute to it.

I agree but we might differ on what counts as a contribution to "society". I was just seriously thinking about this a couple of hours ago--imagine that we feel we ought to give something as a token of appreciation for the time we have been given. How should we do it? I'm thinking that just making money to support one's self seems a rather soulless token.

 

[saymyname]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: saymyname
I'm sure there are many countries where you can live without a job or money. Here though our taxes would be used to support you and I'm just not a fan of that.

I'm not saying you have to be a workaholic. I'm saying you can't be a burden on society. You should try to contribute to it.

I agree but we might differ on what counts as a contribution to "society". I was just seriously thinking about this a couple of hours ago--imagine that we feel we ought to give something as a token of appreciation for the time we have been given. How should we do it? I'm thinking that just making money to support one's self seems a rather soulless token.

Then give money away.

Provide for a family. Don't just live paycheck to paycheck.

 

[Staples]

A degree in philosophy is just as useless as any BA is. They are just general degrees so you can say that you graduated college.

I have a friend who has a BA in philosophy. He drives a cab.

 

[gotsmack]

no, its not that easy to get a degree in philosophy, you have to really love the subject and there is quite a bit of analysis involved, sometimes math.

A real useless major is <random culture> studies. all that is is just specialized sociology WITHOUT the math. and yes real sociology is a legitimate major and I respect it. If you go to a school with a good program you learn how to form a hypothesis, create/perform studies, and then analyze the data with the proper math backing. Sometimes I wish I doubled majored with sociology even though I would be working the same job I have now.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: saymyname
I'm sure there are many countries where you can live without a job or money. Here though our taxes would be used to support you and I'm just not a fan of that.

I'm not saying you have to be a workaholic. I'm saying you can't be a burden on society. You should try to contribute to it.

I agree but we might differ on what counts as a contribution to "society". I was just seriously thinking about this a couple of hours ago--imagine that we feel we ought to give something as a token of appreciation for the time we have been given. How should we do it? I'm thinking that just making money to support one's self seems a rather soulless token.

Then give money away.

Provide for a family. Don't just live paycheck to paycheck.

There are countless ways to contribute. Donate time, become a mentor, clean up a park, write a great novel, raise your children to care about people, become a teacher, take care of animals, don't over-procreate, don't pollute, vote for people that care, become an activist, play beautiful music, etc.

There's a HUGE gap between living for income and being a burden upon society. I only know a couple people that make more than 40 or 50k a year, but I don't know anyone currently on any kind of govt assistance. We live fine on our 10-30k and contribute in ways other than money.

It's doesn't have to be about money, and in many peoples opinon it shouldn't be. If you want it to be for you, cool. Go for it. But don't ask or expect others to.

 

[DainBramaged]

I sit and contemplate unemployment.

 

[saymyname]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: saymyname
I'm sure there are many countries where you can live without a job or money. Here though our taxes would be used to support you and I'm just not a fan of that.

I'm not saying you have to be a workaholic. I'm saying you can't be a burden on society. You should try to contribute to it.

I agree but we might differ on what counts as a contribution to "society". I was just seriously thinking about this a couple of hours ago--imagine that we feel we ought to give something as a token of appreciation for the time we have been given. How should we do it? I'm thinking that just making money to support one's self seems a rather soulless token.

Then give money away.

Provide for a family. Don't just live paycheck to paycheck.

There are countless ways to contribute. Donate time, become a mentor, clean up a park, write a great novel, raise your children to care about people, become a teacher, take care of animals, don't over-procreate, don't pollute, vote for people that care, become an activist, play beautiful music, etc.

There's a HUGE gap between living for income and being a burden upon society. I only know a couple people that make more than 40 or 50k a year, but I don't know anyone currently on any kind of govt assistance. We live fine on our 10-30k and contribute in ways other than money.

It's doesn't have to be about money, and in many peoples opinon it shouldn't be. If you want it to be for you, cool. Go for it. But don't ask or expect others to.

Since I've been on both sides of the fence I'll just agree to disagree. It all made sense back then, just like it does to you now, but I wouldn't go back to that way of life.

$10-$30K a year is not a life. You can't even put a good roof over your head. After taxes and an $800/mo apt, a car payment, food, insurance, utilities, student loans, cell phone bill, etc you are worth absolutely nothing and have no money to spend other than to do the most basic of leasure activities like go camping, hiking, and the occasional movie. I travel, scuba dive, do amateur photography, tinker with upgrades for my PC, etc etc and all those cost money that you won't have making $30K a year. You can forget golf or skiing. There's nothing really wrong with $30K a year per se in a dual income household or straight out of college but I would hope that someone who spends all that money getting educated would set higher goals for themselves and use their full potential. $10K a year? I'm sorry but being that poor in college was enough for me. Price shopping top ramen until you get 20 for a dollar is not a life.

I have to ask. Are you single or married/SO? How old are you? Do you think you might change your mind like I did or is that inconcievable?

 

[Rogodin2]

Interesting thread

I'm a philosophy major/Russian Minor and I didn't want to pursue graduate school. I own my own businesses-I'm the CEO of my corporation, and I believe that the analytical and comprehension skills I learned in my major have helped me greatly in my buisness ventures.

I've been divorced and that set me back financially, but with the opening of two more stores I'll be able to regain my monetary security.

Rogo

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: saymyname

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: saymyname
I'm sure there are many countries where you can live without a job or money. Here though our taxes would be used to support you and I'm just not a fan of that.

I'm not saying you have to be a workaholic. I'm saying you can't be a burden on society. You should try to contribute to it.

I agree but we might differ on what counts as a contribution to "society". I was just seriously thinking about this a couple of hours ago--imagine that we feel we ought to give something as a token of appreciation for the time we have been given. How should we do it? I'm thinking that just making money to support one's self seems a rather soulless token.

Then give money away.

Provide for a family. Don't just live paycheck to paycheck.

There are countless ways to contribute. Donate time, become a mentor, clean up a park, write a great novel, raise your children to care about people, become a teacher, take care of animals, don't over-procreate, don't pollute, vote for people that care, become an activist, play beautiful music, etc.

There's a HUGE gap between living for income and being a burden upon society. I only know a couple people that make more than 40 or 50k a year, but I don't know anyone currently on any kind of govt assistance. We live fine on our 10-30k and contribute in ways other than money.

It's doesn't have to be about money, and in many peoples opinon it shouldn't be. If you want it to be for you, cool. Go for it. But don't ask or expect others to.

Since I've been on both sides of the fence I'll just agree to disagree. It all made sense back then, just like it does to you now, but I wouldn't go back to that way of life.

$10-$30K a year is not a life. You can't even put a good roof over your head. After taxes and an $800/mo apt, a car payment, food, insurance, utilities, student loans, cell phone bill, etc you are worth absolutely nothing and have no money to spend other than to do the most basic of leasure activities like go camping, hiking, and the occasional movie. I travel, scuba dive, do amateur photography, tinker with upgrades for my PC, etc etc and all those cost money that you won't have making $30K a year. You can forget golf or skiing. There's nothing really wrong with $30K a year per se in a dual income household or straight out of college but I would hope that someone who spends all that money getting educated would set higher goals for themselves and use their full potential. $10K a year? I'm sorry but being that poor in college was enough for me. Price shopping top ramen until you get 20 for a dollar is not a life.

I have to ask. Are you single or married/SO? How old are you? Do you think you might change your mind like I did or is that inconcievable?

You're 100% wrong because you're judging from your own limited experience instead of listening to what others are saying. Listen to me before you reply again. My house is about 1800sq', 3bd, 2bath, with a huge lot. Annual taxes are about $1600 per year for the house. I don't make car payments, I buy my cars outright. Insurance is $45 per month. Student loan payments are $90 per month. Utilities and other monthlies (cell, insurances, etc) are about $600 per month. I never buy anything on credit, so I never pay interest or have those bills. Only other monthly bill is gas and food. In other words, it costs me about $1100-$1300 a month to live. That's 12-14k a year. I usually make 20-30k a year. Beginning to get the picture? I have 8 PC's in my home that I'll put against anyones. I have a new gaming laptop. I have an assortment of firearms. I have hundreds of movies, cd's, and thousands of books. I have new clothes, new furniture, & new toys. I go to movies, I go to plays, concerts, etc. Now, I'm not interested in any sports, so that just isn't an expense for me. I drink expensive booze, I tip heavy, give great gifts, and donate to charities.

In other words, I live DAMN well on what I make. You have a faulty assumption of what it costs to live because you believe all reality is equivalent to your own experiences. This is simply not so.

My potential is realized by spending my time helping others. My potential is realized by being happy doing what I do, so that I can treat others well and enjoy the things I do. My goals are met by sticking to my ideals, and striving always to better myself. My goals are the highest possible human dreams and aspirations. I want a family, want to better myself until I die, and want to help others until I die.

I was married too young (20), while in the Navy. We divorced. I am now single, but provide care for my father in my home during his last years. I also have my 11yr old daughter about 1/3 of the year. I am 34.

Will I ever change? Quite possibly. People do. I already have gone thru many phases in life, as is natural. I've become much less restless, much more organized, much more responsible, etc. But I have never really given a diddler's damn about money or jobs, and I doubt if I ever will. Those things hold 0 interest for me. Nothing I dream of or desire in life is tied into money or careers. *shrug* I don't know how else to explain it really.

 

[QueHuong]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Like I said, I think you two should call it quits. Not because you're differen - that can be a great advantage. But because you aren't ok with her being different. You'll never make it together if you can't respect her opinions and choices...and that includes her views on employability, purpose of life, and desired economic levels. I'm not trying to be rude here, truly I'm not.

For someone who says he has extensive education in philosophy, you sure draw major conclusions based on very little evidence. Let's leave relationship advice out of this.

Rich Dad Poor Dad is largely a hoax, and the philosophy of it is only applicable to those that already share it. For the rest of us it's bogus.

The only reference I've made to Rich Dad was the quote on financial indepedence. So what about the concept of financial independence do you feel is a "hoax"? And why do you think it's irrelevant to some people?

My point: people can live just fine without any interest in or focus on money.

Perhaps that's true for some; but that belief is not my thing. I'm not saying I live for money, I'm saying I want to be financially independent and be able indulge on nice things. But this issue at hand is not solely about money; I've stated it twice now: it's about choosing a major that will limit her career choices, of which a low-paying and unsatisfying job could be a consequence of that limited choice.

The statistic quoted earlier:

"* Of the 7500 with full-time employment
o 79.7% worked in an educational institution "

So 8 in 10 with a PhD in philosophy eventually become some type of educator. That's a pretty high statistic. Undoubtedly, some of those with a PhD have a purely academic interest and would only want to teach it, but also likely is that a PhD in philosophy is probably only sought after in academia. So if she wants a job that deals with philosophy day to day, then her only practical option is to teach it. And that is why I say this degree will limit her career choices. This is my primary issue for getting a degree in philosophy: LIMITED CAREER CHOICES (you have been clearly missing my point on this...so hopefully saying this for the third time will get through).

She has never expressed interest in teaching; perhaps if she does teach, she'll love it. But if she doesn't, then she's going to be in a difficult position.

The compromise I've proposed to her: minor in philosophy, but get a practical degree that she could be satisfied in. I don't feel this is an unreasonable suggestion.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: QueHuong

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Like I said, I think you two should call it quits. Not because you're differen - that can be a great advantage. But because you aren't ok with her being different. You'll never make it together if you can't respect her opinions and choices...and that includes her views on employability, purpose of life, and desired economic levels. I'm not trying to be rude here, truly I'm not.

For someone who says he has extensive education in philosophy, you sure draw major conclusions based on very little evidence. Let's leave relationship advice out of this.

Rich Dad Poor Dad is largely a hoax, and the philosophy of it is only applicable to those that already share it. For the rest of us it's bogus.

The only reference I've made to Rich Dad was the quote on financial indepedence. So what about the concept of financial independence do you feel is a "hoax"? And why do you think it's irrelevant to some people?

My point: people can live just fine without any interest in or focus on money.

Perhaps that's true for some; but that belief is not my thing. I'm not saying I live for money, I'm saying I want to be financially independent and be able indulge on nice things. But this issue at hand is not solely about money; I've stated it twice now: it's about choosing a major that will limit her career choices, of which a low-paying and unsatisfying job could be a consequence of that limited choice.

The statistic quoted earlier:

"* Of the 7500 with full-time employment
o 79.7% worked in an educational institution "

So 8 in 10 with a PhD in philosophy eventually become some type of educator. That's a pretty high statistic. Undoubtedly, some of those with a PhD have a purely academic interest and would only want to teach it, but also likely is that a PhD in philosophy is probably only sought after in academia. So if she wants a job that deals with philosophy day to day, then her only practical option is to teach it. And that is why I say this degree will limit her career choices. This is my primary issue for getting a degree in philosophy: LIMITED CAREER CHOICES (you have been clearly missing my point on this...so hopefully saying this for the third time will get through).

She has never expressed interest in teaching; perhaps if she does teach, she'll love it. But if she doesn't, then she's going to be in a difficult position.

The compromise I've proposed to her: minor in philosophy, but get a practical degree that she could be satisfied in. I don't feel this is an unreasonable suggestion.

It's not necessarily unreasonable, but neither is it your choice to make. If she thinks that's a good choice and can be happy with it, cool. If not, can you accept that she has no interest in employability/practicality? Would you be able to support her belief that college may not be about getting a job and be non-judgemental later if her financial options were severely limited?

 

[QueHuong]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

It's not necessarily unreasonable, but neither is it your choice to make. If she thinks that's a good choice and can be happy with it, cool. If not, can you accept that she has no interest in employability/practicality? Would you be able to support her belief that college may not be about getting a job and be non-judgemental later if her financial options were severely limited?

I'm not making, nor am I trying to, any choices for her. I am providing arguments for the other side (which you view as disrespecting and refusing to accept her opinions), which is especially important since this decision could affect the rest of her life, if not at the very least opens and closes certain paths she can take.



I'm curious about something. In almost every single reply of yours, you accuse at least one person of not respecting differing opinions, and in my case, not respecting hers. As I have revealed very little of what I've said to her, how did you conclude that "I'm not ok with her being different"? You finally end by hinting that I'll be judgemental of her if the decision she makes turns out to be wrong, so now I'm quite annoyed.

As you gave me personal relationship advices, let me return the favor by giving you advices on your ambitions of becoming a teacher. You seem to make it a habit of riding a high horse whenever people disagree with you, accusing them of refusing to let other people hold their own personal opinions. Unless you only want to teach sheeps, you should get used to students expressing their disagreement with you without feeling they are disrespecting your opinions, especially if that class is going to be philosophy.

Furthermore, if you want to be a philosophy teacher, you should practice what you teach. Making assumptions for which there're little evidence for will not teach your students cogent reasoning. As I've revealed little of what I've said to her, the conclusions and accusations you make about the nature of our relationship can only be based on careless assumptions.

(And don't mistaken my choice of the word 'revealed' to mean I am hiding anything about my conversations with her. I purposely chose that word to show that you make hasty conclusions based on what is not there. Seeing your inclination for making assumptions, I felt this disclaimer is necessary.)

Learn to receive disagreements without accusing the speaker of disrespecting your opinions, and don't make assumptions for which there are no basis for are my two advices to you.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: QueHuong

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

It's not necessarily unreasonable, but neither is it your choice to make. If she thinks that's a good choice and can be happy with it, cool. If not, can you accept that she has no interest in employability/practicality? Would you be able to support her belief that college may not be about getting a job and be non-judgemental later if her financial options were severely limited?

I'm not making, nor am I trying to, any choices for her. I am providing arguments for the other side (which you view as disrespecting and refusing to accept her opinions), which is especially important since this decision could affect the rest of her life, if not at the very least opens and closes certain paths she can take.



I'm curious about something. In almost every single reply of yours, you accuse at least one person of not respecting differing opinions, and in my case, not respecting hers. As I have revealed very little of what I've said to her, how did you conclude that "I'm not ok with her being different"? You finally end by hinting that I'll be judgemental of her if the decision she makes turns out to be wrong, so now I'm quite annoyed.

As you gave me personal relationship advices, let me return the favor by giving you advices on your ambitions of becoming a teacher. You seem to make it a habit of riding a high horse whenever people disagree with you, accusing them of refusing to let other people hold their own personal opinions. Unless you only want to teach sheeps, you should get used to students expressing their disagreement with you without feeling they are disrespecting your opinions, especially if that class is going to be philosophy.

Furthermore, if you want to be a philosophy teacher, you should practice what you teach. Making assumptions for which there're little evidence for will not teach your students cogent reasoning. As I've revealed little of what I've said to her, the conclusions and accusations you make about the nature of our relationship can only be based on careless assumptions.

(And don't mistaken my choice of the word 'revealed' to mean I am hiding anything about my conversations with her. I purposely chose that word to show that you make hasty conclusions based on what is not there. Seeing your inclination for making assumptions, I felt this disclaimer is necessary.)

Learn to receive disagreements without accusing the speaker of disrespecting your opinions, and don't make assumptions for which there are no basis for are my two advices to you.

You are correct. Having reread much of this thread I was far too accusatory and short-tempered. I apologize for that, to you and the others.

What I read in the inital posts by you and others closely imitates what I'm far too used to hearing: the cliche pro-capitalist 'american way' where people are raised to view education as a means to get a degree in order to get a better job in order to make more money. So much of our current civilization is geared this way that it has become the demon I look for in everything. However, you don't actually ever state plainly that you do not accept the alternative view, merely that you seem to prefer the more popular way or at least strive for more balance than idealism. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, and in fact it's far better than I've come to expect.

I don't mind disagreement, in fact I live for it. Generally speaking it's only thru disagreement that growth/learning is achieved. What I generally run into is dualism where I myself am a relativist (hoping someday to rest firmly in committed relativism). That's usually where my frictions have come from. In other words I generally say my way of seeing things is right for me, and some others, but everyone has their own thing...whereas I usually run into others saying, 'no, this is reality for everyone' - which is patently untrue in my view. There's an important difference there...if I'm right then everyone can have their own thing, but if they're right then I can't have mine. *shrug*

I don't want to be a philosophy teacher, my endorsements are going to be history and some science (probably physics). I only brought up the philosophy thing because after I eventually get my PhD I wouldn't turn down a good professor position.

Anyway, sorry again for accusing. I was putting my own demons onto others.

 

[gotsmack]

Originally posted by: QueHuong


Perhaps that's true for some; but that belief is not my thing. I'm not saying I live for money, I'm saying I want to be financially independent and be able indulge on nice things. But this issue at hand is not solely about money; I've stated it twice now: it's about choosing a major that will limit her career choices, of which a low-paying and unsatisfying job could be a consequence of that limited choice.

The statistic quoted earlier:

"* Of the 7500 with full-time employment
o 79.7% worked in an educational institution "

So 8 in 10 with a PhD in philosophy eventually become some type of educator. That's a pretty high statistic. Undoubtedly, some of those with a PhD have a purely academic interest and would only want to teach it, but also likely is that a PhD in philosophy is probably only sought after in academia. So if she wants a job that deals with philosophy day to day, then her only practical option is to teach it. And that is why I say this degree will limit her career choices. This is my primary issue for getting a degree in philosophy: LIMITED CAREER CHOICES (you have been clearly missing my point on this...so hopefully saying this for the third time will get through).

She has never expressed interest in teaching; perhaps if she does teach, she'll love it. But if she doesn't, then she's going to be in a difficult position.

The compromise I've proposed to her: minor in philosophy, but get a practical degree that she could be satisfied in. I don't feel this is an unreasonable suggestion.

Most Ph.D.s teach or do research, that is why they get Ph.D.s besides If she wants a Ph.D., she has to take her GRE first and if it is a decent program she will have to be in the 90th percentile. maybe 80th is she only wants to do a master.

Anyway, who put you in charge of running her life?

Getting a degree in Philosophy does NOT limit her career choices any more then any other major, however the job market may be smaller. For example, they would not hire a chemistry major to work at a think tank or a poli. sci. major to work in a lab.

It is more important to go to school for something you love, because if you can cut it, getting a degree in Pharmacy will pretty much guarantee you a job out of school, but what is the use if you hate your job. You'll just end up burning out after a few years.

 

[DainBramaged]

wow...this thread got deep