<p>Does anyone feel like briefly explaining the philosophy major? I put that down as one of my major choices (along with psychology and math) because it just seems quite intriguing, but I still know very little about it. I know what philosophy is, but what kinds of things would you study, and would that be something that would be unique when applying to med school?</p>
<p>hahahah maybe if you were interested in bioethical philosophy</p>
<p>what's so funny about that? Music majors go to med school? Journalism. Languages. Literature. Why not philosphy?</p>
<p>No, I just meant that I didn't think philosophy would yield any particular advantage in med school admissions. I didn't mean you would be at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>oh ok. haha. I was like "ummm..." lol. But I was just wondering, because I know med schools don't particularly frown on Bio/Chem majors, but enjoy to see less common ones... I figure most people don't really major in philosphy to go to med school.</p>
<p>Philosophy at Princeton is very well-regarded, with a number of prominent philosophers, including Peter Singer, who is probably the most prominent academic philosopher in the world (in a how well-known he is sense, at least). I have friends majoring in it who say it's very good.</p>
<p>As for how useful philosophy is, law school for example loves philosophy majors. The discipline really creates critical thinkers with flexible minds, in a similar way to math (but without the math, haha). One of my friends who is extremely good at math and could easily major in it (which is no mean feat here) is majoring in philosophy instead, partially because it uses the same kind of analytical skills. And for med school, philosophy could definitely be useful, especially if you concentrate on some of the more interesting applied philosophical/moral issues like the beginning of life, abortion, assisted suicide, etc. I personally really like moral philosophy.</p>
<p>^exactly</p>
<p>which also connects with bioethical philosophy</p>
<p>want to ask is phil major really hard? do you need special innate intelligence to do well (someone who majored told me this) or if you just work hard you can do well. I mean to get As. I know there are diff. concentrate in phil. dept. and some are harder than others but generally. I also am interested in moral issues. thanks</p>
<p>^ in response to squishsquash...</p>
<p>I love Princeton, and I love Philosophy, but Peter Singer is a fool. Not only is he foolish, he is also thoroughly evil, dispassionate, and dangerous. Utilitarianism is perhaps the single worst ethical belief known to man. It's just wrong on so many levels.</p>
<p>For those of you who don't know Singer, he comes right out and states the following (paraphrased):</p>
<p>"Most opponents of abortion attack the assertion that a fetus is a 'person' at conception, and argue that, since it is not a person, it's all right to kill it. I argue, however, that it doesn't matter whether or not it's a person. Since it can't make any conscious, voluntary decisions, it's ok to kill it."</p>
<p>He continues later to say that killing newborn infants is never as morally reprehensible as killing an older human being, because it hasn't developed all of it's "human qualities" yet (speaking, walking, etc.) He relates infanticide to the killing of animals.</p>
<p>What a pig. There are several people (including Nero, Hitler, and Singer) with whom I have always wanted to sit down and argue. All very, very sick men with very, very sad ideas. I almost pity them.</p>
<p>Instead of name-calling and throwing insults at them, how about explaining why he's wrong? Strangely enough, his logic does make sense.</p>
<p>ONE Name</p>
<p>Wilder Penfield- my role model who majored in philosophy at Princeton, and went to HMS/JHU... and finally ended up creating Mcgill Neurosurgery Department in Canada... he is considered one of the greatest canadian-american neurosurgeons in history...</p>
<p>Philosophy, if u understand the hierarchy of academics, can essentially help u in every single subject...</p>
<p>Also,</p>
<p>its a great way to get a rhodes scholarship... cuz it gives u time for academics and sports and being wellrounded... that's what my thinking is... and im assuming thats why wilder penfield partially chose it (besides the great abstract thinking involved and multiple tangent relations)... but with new budding academic fields, its hard to solely major in one thing for people who are curious about the world and everything in it...</p>
<p>"cuz it gives u time for academics and sports and being wellrounded"</p>
<p>what do you mean? do you mean to say that philosophy is an easy subject that doesn't consume alot of time?</p>
<p>considering its class discussion based... im not saying its not hard... but considering what the requirements are for other courses... it is easy on the work load aspect... the reading load is a lot that is all i know...</p>
<p>correct me if im wrong... i meant im just assuming... and im not in university... im majoring in it with mathematics hopefully... all i know is wilder penfield did it for that reason stated in his biography... and he went to princeton so....</p>
<p>
[quote]
I love Princeton, and I love Philosophy, but Peter Singer is a fool. Not only is he foolish, he is also thoroughly evil, dispassionate, and dangerous. Utilitarianism is perhaps the single worst ethical belief known to man. It's just wrong on so many levels.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you were to engage him in a philosophical argument, he would tear you to pieces and then trample your remnants beneath his hooves. In fact, you wouldn't even realize it, because your stubborn self-righteousness would obscure your rational faculties from appreciating the intriguing, challenging line of reasoning behind all of his assertions.</p>
<p>Peter Singer is a balla'. Don't you even think about dissing him.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Instead of name-calling and throwing insults at them, how about explaining why he's wrong? Strangely enough, his logic does make sense.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Precisely. When he and another well-regarded professor of philosophy, Michael Sandel of Harvard University, visited Amherst College recently to speak about the humane treatment of animals--bioethics--the latter wasted a vast majority of precious lecture and discussion time viciously attacking the former, making a damned fool of himself and segueing the entire discussion. Even he couldn't defeat the sensibility of Singer's reasoning, regardless of how hard he tried. So, give it a rest: the man is one of Princeton University's most precious assets.</p>
<p>Well, I love Princeton and philosophy, and I think Peter Singer is rather a scary person and kind of elitist in that he’d probably be okay killing your kids but not his own, you know? But I do respect that he thinks for himself and stands up to his opponents with no fear. That is an excellent quality.</p>
<p>He does come across as a scary villain to many people, but what’s most respectable about him is the consistency with which he stands by, and would apply, his beliefs.</p>
<p>Of course, Ivory Tower theory is different from real world practice.</p>
<p>Well, yeah, thats my point exactly- he’s a no-B.S. person. But then, let’s say (hypothetically, of course, this is technically impossible) his beliefs were PROVEN wrong. He strikes me as a person that would continue to go to all ends to stand up for his beliefs. It goes both ways.</p>
<p>In that sense, he reminds me of Hitler, if nobody believed Hitler and Hitler didn’t have any country. So in a sense I respect him, but I’m also somewhat scared of him. Have you read his work?</p>