<p>does any one major in political science???.....do political scientists make any money??? the course seems intresting..i'm thinking about being a federal judge(later chief justice)this all sounds stupid but whatever</p>
<p>Many people major in it- it's quite popular. Like most fields, people will end up not doing something closely related to what they studied. it's possible to if you want, but oftenrequires an advaanced degree of some kind. Do they make money? About as much as the next humanities major, I would guess. If you're going to law school, poli sci can be helpful, one of the usual pre-law majors (such as history, econ, English, philosophy). If you're into money, check into engineering. More importantly, who you know will help you out. Doing well at a well-known law school and getting recruited by a big firm is a great way to make a lot of money. My advice is study what interests you.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do they make money? About as much as the next humanities major, I would guess.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>::AHEM:: Poli sci is a social science, not a humanity. Don't get us mixed up with the tree huggers, sir.</p>
<p>Anyway, I was a poli sci major, and I can say that it's not exactly the best way to make money. I start grad school in September, but with just my BA, I could expect around 35K to 45K a year working for the government or a firm. Not exactly engineering dough, that. The average real "political scientist" usually has an MA or PhD, and most people in DC, thinktanks, or the fed are making around 55K to 100K a year. It's a very broad range of incomes, depending on the circumstances. I knew a guy at RAND who was complaining about making ends meet. The dude had his PhD from a top ten program and worked at RAND. Ugh. A prof. of mine at UCLA lived in Pacific Palisades with his wife, another prof in the same dept. He was happy, to say the least. </p>
<p>Still, if you're looking to go into law, doing American as your focus as a poli sci major is a good first step.</p>
<p>Whoops, I knew that, and usually post it as such. maybe I was thinking history, as I've recently talked with my suite mates about how I think history is a social science, and not a humanity. Go hug a Japanese snot-covered kid, UCLAri, and enjoy it just a little bit.</p>
<p>... I had one of them wipe his nose than offer me a handshake today. I replied, "eetoo...ato de ii?" or in other words, "umm... is later okay?"</p>
<p>Needless to say, I'm talking a LOT later.</p>
<p>I think history, if it's approached properly, can be a social science. Jared Diamond agrees with me.</p>
<p>Scientificity. Ha. I'm talking about that in my rhetoric class. We just read some of Marx, some Nietzsche, and some Freud. They all seem to have gone through at least some phase of wantimg to be scientific, Freud coping with psychoanalysis not being being enough such towards the end, Nietzsche abadndoning it fairly early (and making fun of it even while he sort of participated), Freud drifting closer and closer towards it. Anyway. Scientificity. Meh.</p>