<p>I love how philosophy always gets thrown in the mix when ‘easy’ majors are being listed. All the while, most of the people on here who have actually taken a REAL philosophy class (i.e. not intro at a community college), will complain endlessly about how dumb it is as they get a C or less, when in reality they just can’t comprehend the material. Philosophy is the very last subject that should arise when talking about regurgitation. If you ask me to substantiate that claim, then you obviously haven’t even taken intro., much less an upper-division course from a four-year.</p>
<p>Lawl, I couldn’t agree with you more. The way you perform in high school may generally correlate with how you perform in CC, however, it certainly isn’t always true. I had a 1.8 GPA in high school, dropped out, received my GED, and since then started CC when I was supposed to enter my junior year of high school, and now have a 3.57 UC trans. GPA as a Psychology major. </p>
<p>In other words, I’m going to be a grade ahead of what would have been my graduating class, transferring to UCLA if I get in, and if not, UCSD, while the people who probably worked much more consistently and harder than me in high school will be a grade behind, and nearly all of which will be at lower ranked schools.</p>
<p>CC isn’t a walk in the park, and despite what others here may say, you do have to work and study, however, I’m sure it’s easier than the UC’s, and as long as you put in a strong effort, you shouldn’t have a problem achieving at least a 3.4. </p>
<p>What is so great about CC is that it offers a chance at redemption for those who disliked high school, and also comes with transfer agreements to some of the best public schools in the nation (UCSD, Davis, UCSB, Irvine, etc.) I did nothing in high school, didn’t even graduate, and now I’m on the Dean’s List at a CC, and have TAG’s to Davis and UCSD a grade ahead of my peers.</p>
<p>Definitely take night classes! If you’re a night owl, like myself, these are both different and more exciting than early morning classes. In fact, while you’re in high school, I would advise that you get started on your CC work asap. Trust me, if you do, you’ll thank yourself later. The faster you get those 60 units with IGETC, the better. </p>
<p>What I did was leave hs for CC (first middle college, then exclusively CC) half way through, but obviously that doesn’t appeal to many people, so I would really suggest considering taking 3-6 units each semester just to get a head start. You can even do online courses that (at least in my experience) require fairly little homework, and you’ll still receive your 3 units toward that 60.</p>
<p>As for how you’ll perform at CC with your sleep habits, that will not even be an issue anymore. Trust me, I was considered “truant” in high school because of absences from sleeping in, but at CC, where you’re permitted to make your own schedule, sleep deprivation and sleeping in are hardly issues. Whether you take night classes or not, I know you’ll be fine, and I wish you luck.</p>
<p>night classes killed me…the only B i ever got in CC were from a night statistics class</p>
<p>what I disliked about it was that it was so late in the day, i got into the habit of completing the work the day it was due. It worked but I wasn’t nearly as prepared as I would have been. Take night classes only if you know you can work at the same level as day classes.</p>
<p>“I love how philosophy always gets thrown in the mix when ‘easy’ majors are being listed. All the while, most of the people on here who have actually taken a REAL philosophy class (i.e. not intro at a community college), will complain endlessly about how dumb it is as they get a C or less, when in reality they just can’t comprehend the material. Philosophy is the very last subject that should arise when talking about regurgitation. If you ask me to substantiate that claim, then you obviously haven’t even taken intro., much less an upper-division course from a four-year.”</p>
<p>As I’m very sure that your 4 weeks (or has it been 3?) at USC has been an eye opening experience, i doubt you have ever taken a hardcore science class where the class average is below 80%. Philosophy is an easier major, as much as you want to defend it, it is the general consensus that people who take philosophy classes have less work and an easier time than those who take science, business, or math classes. Why else would your peers be upset about getting a C in such an easy class?</p>
<p>Just wrapped up my 10th week at USC. Where do you go to school again?</p>
<p>And business classes are cake. Everyone knows that. You are obviously oblivious. </p>
<p>And can you please defend your claim with more than this supposed general consensus? People have different interests and not everyone wants to be a pre-med stereotype ya know. So you keep reading your science book and keep regurgitating the your birdfeed, okay?</p>
<p>Why else would my peers be mad? Because 'tards like you create these untrue stereotypes that make them drop their guard. As a result they are hit with a dose of reality. That’s why. Did you really not catch that? Oh right, you’re a science major. Critical reading is not your forte.</p>
<p>Lastly, I aced my statistics night class. Shall I emulate you and queue my intellectual superiority spiel? I can if you’d like.</p>
<p>Of course people have different interests and it’s a real shame that most pre-med students choose the norm of bio,chem, biochem… and don’t explore their passion.</p>
<p>But imagine sending a philosophy major into an upper division biology class. Would you expect them to do well? no, they have no foundation for the material and would not be able to comprehend even the basics of the class. On the contrary, if a bio major enrolled into an upper division philosophy class, they would more likely pick up the concepts and do well. Not because they have a foundation for it, but because they don’t need any previous knowledge to understand the concepts. </p>
<p>You say that science classes are about “regurgitation”, which science classes have you taken? </p>
<p>Science classes are about processes of systems that are so intricate and complex that the lower level community college classes (which I’m guessing are the only ones you have ever taken) need to be all facts . Science classes (not at the CC level) are about understanding the mechanisms for why something occurs. It is not regurgitation of “birdfeed” and that is how I would expect someone who has never taken a challenging course to interpret it.</p>
<p>You seem to think that critical thinking is a gift that only few possess. We all can observe and reflect on our own beliefs, even a child. </p>
<p>As for the spiel, i think that you have a good start with the rhetorical question but don’t let your intellect get too hurt if you decide to take a class that makes those neurons work a little!</p>
<p>I have to agree with grey, upper division Philosophy is not easy. And I’m not biased, as this is coming from a Math and Econ major.
Philosophy trains you to be a meticulous thinker. You will notice differences where previously, in your judgment, none existed. You’re expected to distinctly explain a difficult concept, position, or argument, and clarity is harder than you think. You will learn the tools of the trade that philosophers use, so you can employ them in your thought processes and distinguish them when reading philosophy - all for the improvement of your understanding.
Anonymousername (pinker?), in specific, what is easy about upper division philosophy? How much easier is a class like anatomy where you know whether or not you got the correct answer? Anyone can memorize, but in philosophy you actually have to be smart to succeed. You can study for hours for a philosophy test and still do poorly. That doesn’t happen for most of the hard sciences.</p>
<p>If you want an easy major, pick sociology. </p>
<p>There’s no dispute that in society, hard sciences are more important on average. That’s not a reason to bag phil majors though.</p>
<p>not bagging (as i was typing that I wrote shagging :D) but grey seemed to be wondering why phil was getting tossed into the mix for easy majors…</p>
<p>I’m sorry rpicton, you seem like a genuine and reasonable person, but I disagree. you said:</p>
<p>“How much easier is a class like anatomy where you know whether or not you got the correct answer? Anyone can memorize, but in philosophy you actually have to be smart to succeed. You can study for hours for a philosophy test and still do poorly. That doesn’t happen for most of the hard sciences”</p>
<p>it happens in pretty much all hard sciences. Anatomy is the perfect example in fact. Anatomy and Biochemistry seem to be the most difficult courses that MCB/IB/premedical/dental/pharmacy students take. There is the factor of memorization but students also need to understand the inner workings of the body parts and how they function together. If one part is altered, they are tested on what the consequence will be for the rest of the body. Biochem is another example, sure there is a component of memorization, but students need to understand how a cycle or process functions and what the products are from it (ex. the krebbs cycle) memorizing the subject won’t get you through it, understanding the whole process will. Comprehension is key in these classes not memorization.</p>
<p>And it is a hallmark for “hard science” students to study for hours on end and and still be below the class average of 55%. </p>
<p>Hope I didn’t offed you like I did grey.</p>
<p>Complex processes? Describe to me a hard-science process that isn’t algorithmic at best. Those can be memorized I’m afraid. Even the most complicated processes are finite in nature and limited to our planet’s physical properties and limitations. Philosophical inquiry, on the other hand, is nowhere nearly as limited.</p>
<p>I’m not going to explain to you how philosophy is not algorithmic. </p>
<p>Further, what proof do you have of hard-science students jumping into upper-division philosophy and succeeding? Your proof would obviously be anecdotal at best, and that’s quite a sweeping assertion, sir! Do you really think that anyone can just jump in and do well? Realize that you need to make reference to past philosophies in your articulations, lest you’re a philosopher yourself and operate in a vacuum. You’d have to do so much research to substantiate your references that you’d be forced to… <em>gasp</em> …take a couple introductory philosophy courses. Do you even know what philosophy is? What classes have you taken? I’ve taken my fair share of hard-sciences – albeit not at the upper-division university level. Despite this, AP credit is granted at most universities, so my share is as good as anyone’s. Nonetheless, I’d like you to unravel philosophy with me as I’ve tried to do for your hard-sciences. I’m curious as to the source of your pretentiousness regarding philosophy. You must be a vast fund of knowledge on the subject.</p>
<p>genetics.</p>
<p>in fact I have taken philosophy classes (plural), all of them were taken at a CC (no different from your experience) and I found them to be a piece of cake. </p>
<p>And as much as you might want to be included in having taken your “fair share” of science courses; AP’s like biology and environmental science might seem like a big deal to a high schooler, but to students at USC/UCB/UCLA it’s the norm.</p>
<p>All professional schools who require science prerequisites do not accept AP scores. This should make it clear that they are not indicative of college level courses, which I know, is not what they told you when you were 16 years old. That’s why 500+ students who have already taken AP Biology sign up for Bio 1A.</p>
<p>so you think that philosophy is hard and I think it’s easy…maybe we should switch majors :D:D:D</p>
<p>I’m taking two upper-division philosophy classes currently. And that’s fine if you don’t want to address my points. I wouldn’t want to.</p>
<p>By the way, your usage of the semicolon is wrong. :D:D:D:D</p>
<p>someone’s bitter</p>
<p>it’s just getting really enjoyable to see you getting aggravated over the internet.</p>
<p>(and going after my grammar…score!)</p>
<p>Which points would you like me to spell out for you? You seem upset that someone can have the opinion that philosophy is an easy major so you throw a tantrum and get all hot and bothered. </p>
<p>I think that mentally, you are a teen, seriously maybe 15…16 years old. Every time someone contradicts you, you start with the name calling. You go after their grammar (lol) and you get really upset. Calm down because physically you’re an adult, mentally you might want to start acting like one as well. </p>
<p>this conversation is getting less intelligent every time you write a sentence. I think the mere immaturity that you show is evidence enough that people such as yourself do not belong in the same institutions as intelligent people. </p>
<p>hope that clears things up! :)</p>
<p>The thing is anonymous, most CC philosophy classes in my experience are taught like a history course is taught which in actuality isn’t philosophy at all. The philosophy classes I took at CC have basically regurgitated different theories famous philosophers have had and defined several key terms… I even took one Philosophy class on Eastern Religions which literally involved memorizing about 30 key terms per religion.</p>
<p>I am in the middle of my first real Philosophy class at UCLA right now and to be honest, it is probably going to be the easiest course I take this semester, however, it is still about 100x more difficult than any Philosophy class I took at the CC level because it not only involves memorization and understanding theories, but coming up with your own theories yet being able to justify those theories with other theories of more renown philosophers… I am only 3 weeks in so I may be a bit off, but this is what my understanding of the major has been…</p>
<p>Finally, it is pretty obvious that Science classes require more work on a week to week basis than Philosophy, History, and well nearly* everything non-science based… The reason being is that grey_syntactics is mostly* correct in saying Sciences tend to be based on a lot of memorization or teachers tend to have weekly assignments opposed to the standard Midterm/Final and possible research paper most non-science classes have (atleast at the undergrad level). Now, I have never ( and probably will never ) taken a science course at a university so I may be wrong in that analysis, however, at least I haven’t attacked anyone’s grammar in any of my posts so :P</p>
<p>haha…thanks</p>
<p>reasonable answer, but grey_syntactics is incorrect by saying science classes are simple memorization, i think I would know, not the guy who took a couple AP classes in high school…</p>
<p>im premed, the majority of my classes science classes involve rote memorization. I took intro to philosophy and ethics at my ccc and it was memorization too, but im sure at a higher level (UC) it would involve more elements. My professor seriously gave us word banks and multiple choice tests with like 3 short answer questions. That is not philosophy haha…</p>
<p>Aggravated? Hmmm, nah man this is a discussion forum, so don’t label me as aggravated if I offer some rebuttal to your argument. Also, by attacking your grammar I was mocking your previous post. Come on, I know you at least caught that.</p>
<p>Anyway, I’ll break things down for you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>These…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And can you please defend your claim with more than this supposed general consensus?
Anecdotal evidence and the general consensus are the best you will ever find. What kind of evidence are you looking for, empirical? their are no such statistics, it would take a fool hearty philosophy major to assume such a stupid thing. testimonial? i would refer to the posts above yours, those users are one of so many (including yours truly) who experienced philosophy and thought that it was such an easy class. Another commented on how his philosophy class at UCLA will probably be the easiest one he takes this term. Analogical evidence? How about the analogy of philosophy student in upper division bio class to biology student in upper division philosophy class. Take your pick. </p>
<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by grey_syntactics
Describe to me a hard-science process that isn’t algorithmic at best.
It is more algorithmic than philosophy (which requires none) but it also is about understanding concepts. You, seem to not understand that there is no algorithm in to understanding the mechanisms of a cell or the infinite processes of DNA, but of course I would assume that someone who has as much science experience as a 14 year old to assume that they know all the inner workings of the scientific world. </p>
<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by grey_syntactics
what proof do you have of hard-science students jumping into upper-division philosophy and succeeding?
common sense, you would be a complete idiot not to see that. In your rigorous upper division *philosophy *classes (and your vast 10 week’s of experience in them :X) how have the lower division one’s helped you? </p>
<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by grey<em>syntactics
Do you really think that anyone can just jump in and do well? Realize that you need to make reference to past philosophies in your articulations, lest you’re a philosopher yourself and operate in a vacuum.
Reference to philosophies can be looked but by a mere Google search, also interpretations and counterarguments. Philosophy exams have no true answers, from my experience with the subject, (under 3 different professors) which is more than your experience with science, an exam consists of an essay. You write about where you stand on an issue. A monkey can accomplish that task.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grey</em>syntactics
Do you even know what philosophy is?
yes, it is the study of fundamental principals such as existence, values, mind, and language (sounds hard). Any idea about what science is?</p>
<p>Science studies concepts now that you won’t know about until you are 50, but still you won’t be able to understand any of it, because you only have a degree in fundamental principals such as existance…
</p>
<p>here is a quote that I particularly enjoyed, I’m sure you will as well:</p>
<p>*
Philosophy
"Why It Won’t Help You Get a Job: This isn’t ancient Greece: No one is going to pay you money, or allow you to sodomize their attractive son, in exchange for your knowledge of existence. Never has there been an employer who’s said “Man, we’re having all kinds of problems, I wish we had someone on our team who could reference and draw conclusions from the story of Siddhartha that would pull up our fourth quarter numbers.” I took many philosophy classes and it involved reading and smoking a **** pile of weed. You don’t need to pay 20,000 dollars a year to do that. All you need is twenty dollars and a library card.</p>
<p>What Job You’ll End Up With: Thanks to your extensive knowledge of philosophy, you’re now self-aware enough to know that most jobs out there will make you totally miserable. So most likely you’ll wait tables part time and hope someone starts paying you for the bi-monthly entries on your blog."*</p>
<p>you must be going for the big law degree, i guess it’s true that one doesn’t need to know anything to be an ambulance chaser. </p>
<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by grey_syntactics
What classes have you taken?
Into to phil
Theory of Ethics
Theory of knowledge</p>
<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by grey_syntactics
I’d like you to unravel philosophy with me as I’ve tried to do for your hard-sciences. I’m curious as to the source of your pretentiousness regarding philosophy.</p>
<p>not pretentiousness, reality. If you truly believe that philosophy is a hard class, maybe you aren’t cut out for any subject.</p>
<p>In the end, I see philosophy as a subject of the basics. You’re tested on your opinion of an issue, one doesn’t need extensive skills or knowledge to accomplish that, a child is capable of expressing his thoughts on a subject. Science classes need a foundation, you would not know because you don’t have a foundation. You seem to believe that an AP course and a remedial science course from community college makes you an expert on all sciences, (which I know I’m not). It makes you a dreamer, sorry a philosopher.</p>
<p>now that essay you are planning on writing for me about why philosophy is such a rigorous and confusing subject for you, will go unread. </p>
<p>I’m out.</p>
<p>1) Empirical evidence: take an upper-division philosophy class and come back with a screenshot of your A-grade.</p>
<p>2) You are not explaining how science is not algorithmic, you’re just saying that it’s not and that I’m dumb. Might aswell plug your ears, close your eyes, and run away yelling “no no no no no!”</p>
<p>3) Common sense is your proof? Again, making allusion to things like common sense, general consensus, and the obviously apparent, is no way to justify… anything.</p>
<p>4) Yes, exams are usually essays. What format are science-based exams in? Oh, yeah. A monkey actually CAN do those and have a 25% chance of getting a right answer each time, and a .25^n chance of getting a perfect score. Which probability do you think is higher, since you keep referring to this monkey of yours? Since you couldn’t ace statistics, I’m not surprised by this flaw in your ingenious monkey analogy.</p>
<p>5) I see you know how to type google.com. Great definition!</p>
<p>6) I’ve seen that many times here on cc. Guess who wrote it? Another ■■■■■■■■ blogger! Ironic. I’m actually not a philosophy major though. I’m studying Public Policy, Management, and Development. Sooo… yeah. I’m guessing you’re pre-med. So you’re either going to be an MD or a middle school biology teacher. Best of luck on that dichotomy. </p>
<p>7) I don’t think philosophy is hard at all. I’m just passionate and appreciative about the subject and don’t take well to ignorance. </p>
<p>Lastly, since you’ve resorted to personal swipes at me, I’m going to assume that you’ve exhausted your argument. To anyone else reading this, do us a favor and read through our arguments. To those who have sided with me (everyone else on this thread), you give me hope that the world isn’t filled with, well, people like this.</p>
<p>BTW, don’t get me wrong, I know that the hard-sciences are just that – hard. I’ve noticed that the most successful science students are the ones passionate about their subject. It’s just difficult to be passionate about so many seemingly dry subjects. I have mad respect for hard-science students, but I have zero tolerance for self-righteous science (or otherwise) students.</p>
<p>+1 grey_syntactics</p>