<p>I was thinking of majoring in Economics or Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin and aspired to go to HLS. I'm more geared towards studying Philosophy because that seems much more interesting than Economics, but I have no idea which major would be easier to get better grades and a higher GPA in. </p>
<p>What do you guys think I should major in? and.... Is majoring in Philosophy simply a waste of my time since the only people that really make the dough who major in phil. complete their PHD's??? (aka... I wouldn't really have anything to fall back on)</p>
<p>Uh, few philosophy majors "make the dough" with any degree besides a JD, MD, or actuary degree (or the like). Philosophy majors tend not to major in it for the money. Philosophy and economics both tend to be difficult programs that grade on the harder side of things.</p>
<p>Don't pay attention to the poster who says that you won't get into HLS. UT is a top state school and if you are interested in philosophy, that major is fine. Most students don't know much about philosophy as it is a subject that is taken in college, and is not typically available in high school. </p>
<p>UT has mega grade deflation (it is a hard school to get a high GPA). If you look at the gradeinflation site you will see what I mean. I cannot comment on average GPA's in fields such as philosophy at UT. To get into HLS you will have to have very high grades.</p>
<p>I've heard of a girl from UT with a 158 on LSAT and a 3.9/3.8 GPA, Business major and good EC's that's made it to Havard Law. She had good EC's though and was a URM.</p>
<p>"If you are taking a major just because its easy, then you're probably not HYS material, its as simple as that."</p>
<p>And you say that because...</p>
<p>I really wonder what gives you the authority to make such a statement. Are you on the Harvard Law admissions committee, or, just overly judgemental (even when you lack the information to make any sort of judgement)?</p>
<p><em>yawn</em> A refusal to admit to one's own lack of talent is pretty easy. This guy obviously just watns to play the gpa game, and if he's that worried about gpa he definitely won't make a 170+ necessary for HLS.</p>
<p>The fact that URM can get in with crappy scores is immaterial to this convo. IF he were one of them he wouldn't even need to get that 3.9. Just coast and get significantly worst index scores (Hispanics and Afircan Americans score on average 10 points less). Being white or any non-affirmative action group, and he can expect to meet the same high standards as everyone else.</p>
<p>Sometimes people just worry. I've known a lot of people like this. I've got a friend here at UT who's literally paranoid about his GPA and he overreacts whenever a test comes about and will do triple all nighters, whatever -- even if the work isn't necessary. But there might be method to the madness because he's maintained a 4.0 GPA, even while taking the hardest classes.</p>
<p>You can't just go making statements like that.</p>
<p>I guess, but he really phrased it like he wanted to take an easy major just to pump up his GPA. And his assumption that he could make Harvard when he doesn't even know his LSAT yet is a sign he wants to go there knee-jerk rather than considering if its right.</p>
<p>At any rate, public schools sucks. UT though is probably one of the best ones and has a very fair system. I should've gone there myself.</p>
<p>From personal experience, I can tell you that taking a challenging major will keep you out of top law schools. When, on the average, your 1450 SAT students are getting less than 3.0s, there's a problem getting a high enough GPA for Harvard. When those same students get A-s (without a problem) in liberal arts courses, it's easy to see that some majors can effectively preclude you from law school. </p>
<p>Much easier to get a HYS-level GPA from an easy major than a hard one, and I've never seen much evidence to indicate that admissions committees adjust for difficulty. The high-GPA kids are rewarded in other ways - esp. with merit scholarships. Generally, with the legal profession, it's so much easier to do what everyone else does - group behaviour is rewarded. Much better to be a poli sci/history/English major than to do something unconventional and challenging, like physics. It is a pattern that I've seen in admissions and also in hiring practices. (After engineering, which thrives on innovation and rewards those who do things their own way, it's a very difficult adjustment - but that's my own bias.)</p>
<p>In short, a hard major can keep you out of HYS.</p>
<p>Well, this is in part made up for by the LSAT weighting. Harvard seems to be the only one out of the top schools to not GPA as heavily as LSAT, though you probably can only have a 3.6 instead of a 3.8 if you get something like a 180. Thats what the LSAT is there for.</p>
<p>A smart person would be able to do well in a hard science (3.5) which wouldn't limit them too much in law school applications; of course it will be much harder work than even a 4.0 in poli sci but dems da breaks.</p>
<p>At a GPA below a 3.5, even a 180 LSAT won't seem to get you into very top law schools such as HYS, even though a person with a 3.0 or whatever at certain science programs is pretty smart, probably smarter than those that slack off and get into Harvard. But a pretty msart person should probably be able to get a 3.5 even in hard program, which is good enough from harvard. </p>
<p>That was my point in the first place, and it seems clear upon rereading it that the meaning was entirely the same. Don't put words into my mouth you retard.</p>
<p>"Is majoring in Philosophy simply a waste of my time since the only people that really make the dough who major in phil. complete their PHD's???"
Haha, you're in for a reality check if you think humanities PhDs "really make the dough."</p>