Why Philosophy is a genuinely AWESOME degree

Well now you're just showing that you don't know the difference between fine art and 'the arts', which most people use as a byword for the humanities. Well done for yet another spectacular failure of comprehension.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Only people desperate to elevate their poor choice of degree will refer to their subject as 'the arts'. STEM doesn't have to do that as we're already awesome.
You keep saying it, but no-one is buying it. Philosophy is a waste of time.

Firstly, regarding the salary statistics, the ones provided happen to present an especially rosy picture for Philosophy graduates.

But you'll be hard pressed to find any statistics which rank Philosophy graduates' salaries below their English or History counterparts

This thread is essentially aimed at people looking at Russell Group unis - who, this being TSR, are likely the majority. Beyond that, I admit there are no guarantees, but Philosophy is the equal to any of the other humanities.

The point is that Philosophy students from the top universities have, if they so choose, extremely successful careers in areas such as high finance, business and law, and are well placed intellectually to do so.

May I ask how your English student friends are faring?

Philosophy is not the problem in your case, it sounds more like a mixture of the institution and a lack of nous in the jobs market.

Of course if you're a Philosophy student it's unlikely you'll be handed an obvious career like a medicine student, but isn't this the same for any other humanities or social science student?

Just reading some books from the local library is nothing like doing it at undergrad. As I say, Philosophy is a process, which can only be learnt by doing it with other people trained in philosophy. Good luck doing that with your librarian.

You cite not using philosophical knowledge in your job as a reason not to do it. This is patently incorrect. A degree is worth the intellectual skills you gain on it, and little else (barring vocational degrees). No History student in business ever breaks out their knowledge of the causes of the English Civil War midway through a meeting, and no English student in business breaks out their analysis of Macbeth's soliloquy in the office - it's the skill of analysis which they use every day that counts.

You're more or less the only vocal Philosophy-hater on this thread. So I would have thought most people are 'buying it'. Philosophers know we're awesome - why do you think I keep telling people just how awesome we are? Dude, the clue's even in the title of the thread!

Posted from TSR Mobile

This is just a patent lie. I just don't understand why you're outright making things up? Tell it to the Philosophy grads stacking shelves and on the dole that they ''chose'' that - that they could have ''chosen'' a lucrative career in finance etc. It's not about choice at all - it's about what doors that degree opens, what employers want and what demonstrable experience and skill you have as a result of your degree (not transferable skills that you can gain through self-study and working part time in a shop etc) and your only 'choice' is within those limits which are pretty limited with a non-vocational degree such as Philosophy. In fact, doors will close (apprenticeships, NVQ2/3, other undergrad courses to retrain).

I disagree with this part of your post. Philosophy graduates are spoilt for choice, like graduates of other subjects, for what they CAN apply to but it doesn't mean that their personal profile (experience, temperament, abilities, interviewing technique etc) will fit or even be competitive for the jobs out there. That, is where the onus is on the individual to improve these areas and make them more closely fitting to the area of the job sector they want to end up in - the degree is pretty much the baseline (be that for economics, CS, philosophy, engineering etc), and not by itself a major indicator of who will and won't secure employment.

There's the other angle that there simply is too much competition for every graduate role out there - so you are inevitably bound to hear of people not securing something.

My opinion is that almost every degree holder has the opportunity to a decent graduate job if they tick the right boxes and have a bit of luck behind them; that, however, does not mean anyone is guaranteed increased prospects by their degree subject alone.

TL;DR the individual and external factors are more to blame than the degree one pursues.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Exactly. You're admitting that the statistics you've presented - seemingly as solid proof of how good Philosophy degrees are - aren't actually representative of the whole. That's my gripe with those stats and your presentation of them.

History and English (or any other arts degrees) have nothing to do with this and I made no reference to them. You started a thread about how good Philosophy degrees are (actually you've described them/it as 'Awesome' so I'm discussing Philosophy degrees with you, not English/History. But since you bring them up - no, there's not much difference, they're all equally as useless in my opinion.

You've posted a thread about the benefits of studying Philosophy and you've strongly suggested that it will lead to employment with a high starting salary. You haven't specified how many Philosophy graduates get those jobs, you haven't specified which institutions they graduate from and you haven't explained the statistics you've posted.

As you've conceded, someone studying this 'awesome' degree at an ex-poly isn't likely to be earning the salaries you're suggesting. So straight away, your whole defense of the degree as a means to employment is undermined if you're not being 100% transparent with people.

This is just a patent lie. I just don't understand why you're outright making things up? Tell it to the Philosophy grads stacking shelves and on the dole that they ''chose'' that - that they could have ''chosen'' a lucrative career in finance etc. It's not about choice at all - it's about what doors that degree opens, what employers want and what demonstrable experience and skill you have as a result of your degree (not transferable skills that you can gain through self-study and working part time in a shop etc) and your only 'choice' is within those limits which are pretty limited with a non-vocational degree such as Philosophy. In fact, doors will close (apprenticeships, NVQ2/3, other undergrad courses to retrain).

Ah, this old chestnut. We're talking about a degree subject. Lets stick to that degree subject. If you're going to start adding extra reasons why people can't get jobs, we could always throw in recessions, the weather, interview attire, the waxing and waning of the moon....
And believe me, it's not 'my' case - it's thousands of cases. Your argument in this instance sounds a lot like special pleading to me. Most unis have decent careers advice, so why do most unis have poor Philosophy employment rates in professional graduate roles?

It's not a vocational degree intended to catapult people into a job and when you actually think about it - that's not it's purpose at all.

That's exactly my point. You don't need a 3 year degree to have analytical skills. So what have you payed for?

...

I'm sorry you misunderstood me: they are representative. They aren't just made up you know. As the website says: 'This data represents average figures based on statistics from Graduate Recruitment Bureau and HESA, correct as of October 2015'. My remak was merely that they were at the higher end of the sets of figures that I had researched, but they're still perfectly valid, and suggest that a great deal of Philosophy graduates are very successful in the jobs market, regardless of your anecdotal evidence.



The reason I made reference to them was that others already had done, who were implying Philosophy was a poor degree (with worse prospects than them). By introducing a comparison with the other humanites I also transferred the argument from one solely about Philosophy to one about the humanities in general. This makes the employability argument much easier from my persepctive, because there are trillions of humanities degree holders with extrememly successful careers in law, finance and business. This is just a fact. Perhaps Philosophy doesn't get you there on its own - but absolutely no degree will for these sectors aside from perhaps Law or Finance, and no one's suggesting everyone has to do those.


I've suggested that Philosophy can lead to excellently paid jobs. This is perfectly true and I'd have hoped you would show a little more faith in the intelligence of those reading this. Philsophy is a fantastic intellectual discipline which employers respect - but if you go to a university which hardly ever gets any pupils into the most sought after positions, no one is arguing, least of all me, that Philosophy will give you the miraculous powers to do so, and I expect most people can see this without me explaining it to them.

Does someone espousing the benefits of studying Literature have to go through every university in the UK and explain inividually what the job prospects would be just to say that English can lead to excellent employment? I think not. In general this particular criticism is a strange one: clearly, for example, I'm not suggesting that Philosophy should take the place of a plumbing apprenticeship for a would-be plumber, but following your sentiments one could be forgiven for thinking that I am. I am not. I speak to the intellectually and academically enlightened, and make no bones about it.



A means to employment is very much a secondary reason for studying Philosophy. The primary one is, and always will be, personal intellectual fulfillment and improvement. The only reason I brought employment into the debate was to reassure those studying Philosophy that their skills are valued by employers. They are, and this is backed up by the statistics I provided from the Graduate Recruitment Bureau. This is all very reasonable. Perhaps it isn't on the level of Medicine, but then I never said it was.





So I see now that your argument is not with Philosophy but all humanities. Your research is simply lacking. Any degree from a good institution will be enough, if you have the soft skills, to gain you entry into a vast array of very well paid professions. For example, I just looked up two management consultancy firms, Deloitte and KPMG, and both say all they require for entrance is a '2:1 in a any discipline'. This is just one example. Here's another: in this article 'Senior Managing Director in Global Capital Markets at Morgan Stanley explains that there’s a misconception that most investment banks aren’t receptive to applicants from humanities or languages disciplines. “This couldn’t be further from the truth,” he says. “At Morgan Stanley we have employees from all sorts of backgrounds who do extremely well in this profession. I’m a history graduate myself.”'
http://thegatewayonline.com/investment-banking/introducing-investment-banking/morgan-stanley-why-humanities-and-languages-degrees-are-important-to-investment-banks

So much for the arts being useless.
.


No, I fully agree that a Philosophy degree from an awful institution will be as useless as a Maths or History or Economics degree from an equally awful institution. Clearly it is not 'thousands' of cases, as shown by the average data provided by the Graduate Recruitment Bureau, and if it is it's because some people choose Philosophy because they think it will be easy, and these people were never destined for a successful career regardless.You can hardly blame the subject for people's misuse of it.



I quite agree, and I have neither said that it does catapult you into a job, nor that it's its purpose is to do so. I have no idea why you seem to think I have. A Philosophy degree can gain you excellent employment if you go looking for it, but this was never the aspect that I particularly thought made it 'awesome', just as good as similar subjects - and certainly worth including so that peple diddn't write it off as unemployable. It was other apsects that give it its 'awesome' quality, such as its breadth, the subject material, the combination of science and arts skills and its impact on the world around us.


Firstly, it's all about the level to which you study. If you seriously think someone who did Philsophy at undergrad and then perhaps a masters after that is at the same level as someone who read some books in a library you're deluded. Part of going to university is the fact that your work is marked and as such you're forced to learn, work and perfect your skills. Very few can motivate themsleves to do this at home with the ever-present tempations around them.

Besides, the economic viabilty of university is another discussion, so I suggest you find a thread on it, there are many.








Posted from TSR Mobile

Let's agree to disagree. I don't like these discussions to descend into personal digs and I can sense some in your response

I'm really sorry if any did creep in, I do always try to stay as civilised as possible, but sometimes I can become rather rhetorical. I hope you have more luck with your job search in the future

1) In terms of skill in logical thought and precision, Philosophy matches any science or quantitative subject. Formal Logic notation is notorious for its complexity, and on Oxford’s website, in the description of the Logic unit, it warns that even students who took Further Maths A Level ‘will struggle’.

Hahaha you take a first year logic course which is slightly harder than A-level maths? Wow that must be really hard.

To be fair that quote referred to a second year option Though the first year stuff at unis is often very difficult

Yeah but it doesn't come close to being as hard maths-wise as physics, chemistry or engineering

Only people desperate to elevate their poor choice of degree will refer to their subject as 'the arts'. STEM doesn't have to do that as we're already awesome.