Taking first Philosophy class this semester, help me pass

[MathEconomist]

Very few naked undergrad degrees will get you a good job these days. I haven't seen evidence recently that philosophy BA's with no other skills do worse than business or psychology or journalism or english BA's. They all do fairly badly. The only degrees I know of that, by themselves, are likely to guarantee you a non-crappy decent paying job are engineering and computer science, and even the latter is questionable. To be honest, if I'm hiring for an intro-level business office or sales position, I'd probably be more inclined to hire a philosophy major than a business major. Specific knowledge and skills are easy to pick up later. Learning how to think and write is not something so easy to pick up on the job.

[hmkpoker]

Well, I guess at that point it boils down to other more specific factors. I know some philosophy majors that can positively thrash me in any debate, and others who are boneheads that floated through and wanted to take BS classes. Same goes for business majors.

Engineering is a strong degree, but it's a lot harder than the others. Comp sci grads often find themselves working for Bill Lumburgh [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[IronUnkind]

What's the title of your class? Who is the professor? What school? What are the class requirements?

[Monty Cantsin]

Here's what you need to know in a nutshell:

All of philosophy has its roots in a conflict between two schools that were established during the golden age of classical greek culture: the Platonists and the Archimedeans.

Every major philosopher and school of thought since then can be traced back to this argument. Essentially, the history of philosophy is just a series of fancy variations on these foundational concepts.

The argument concerns the nature of reality. Both schools believe that reality is constructed from a series of core concepts or "solids" but disagree about the number and nature of these concepts.

Platonists believe that the universe is composed of 5 solids that correspond to the 5 humors or immutable affectations. Whereas Archimedeans believe there are 13 solids, plus time. The inclusion of time as a solid is the most contentious point and the axis around which most philosophical arguments revolve. cf Neitzsche's "eternal return", Spinoza's "infinite essense", et al.

The status of time as either concrete (Platonists) or monadic (Archimedeans) is the driving force behind all the important -isms and debates in philosophy:

Cartesian Duelism - Descartes believed that the universe was comprised of mind (time) and body (matter) locked in a perpetual struggle, like two wrestlers.

Bergsonian Hermeneutics - Bergson defined believed that time was "memory devouring space" and that all truth statements were therefore empty vessels of meaning.

Hegelian Dialectics - Hegel's concept of Zeit or "Time of No Time" puts him strictly in the Platonists camp, but as a sort of Archimedean double agent. Of Hegel we must simply remember Adorno's dictum that he "cannot be trusted".

Wittgenstein's Tractatus - Wittgenstein (like Archimedes himself) was a fictional character created by the philosopher and mathemetician Bertrand Russell as a demonstration of time's isohedradic structure, "logic speaking to itself through meaning." Many people are unaware of Wittgenstein's fictional status and a Sherlock Holmesian cult of personality has sprung up around him.

Deleuze and Guattari - In the late 20th century these two European figures attempted to put modern philosophy back on track by unifying the rational, enlightenment approach to time as mental construct (signifier time) with the romantic view of time as a ratio of physical integers (signified time). Modern day Deleuzians (of which I count myself) believe that time is both literary (solid) and scientific (vapor) and refer to it as "the beast with two backs".

Hope this helps, good luck with your class!

/mc

[Philo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's a reason may people in philosophy go on to become lawyers, programmers and such

[/ QUOTE ]

No, comp sci students go on to become programmers. Philosophy students usually go to get crap jobs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, philosophy majors are the only major that are in the top tier of admissions for both law school and medical school.

[Philo]

[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, if I'm hiring for an intro-level business office or sales position, I'd probably be more inclined to hire a philosophy major than a business major.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is, as a matter of fact, the trend in hiring practices by businesses these days.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's a reason may people in philosophy go on to become lawyers, programmers and such

[/ QUOTE ]

No, comp sci students go on to become programmers. Philosophy students usually go to get crap jobs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, philosophy majors are the only major that are in the top tier of admissions for both law school and medical school.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm.. he's a guy signing up for entry level classes. I think he knows better the value of philosophy classes/degrees then anyone else.