Philosophy Discussion Forums

Hello.

I am currently in the first year of University, and I'm starting to think that my current major isn't really for me. Because of that, I'm considering switching majors on my second year.

I have been, and still am, intrigued by the nature of consciousness, and I would love to study it further while also writing about the topic—outside of just writing about it in online forums that is.

So the question is, in order for me to more effectively pursue these things, would I be better off majoring in Philosophy or Neuroscience?

FYI, My primary interests regarding the topic of consciousness are mainly about how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness.
I am aware that this is closer to philosophy than neuroscience, but on the other hand, I feel that one needs to be proficient in both philosophy of mind AND neuroscience in order to answer these questions fully and in more detail, as I believe that subjective existence and physical/objective existence are inevitably and closely interconnected.

And of course, I'm also taking the job opportunities into consideration. Compared to majoring in neuroscience, majoring in philosophy seems too economically risky just because compared to the former, it doesn't offer as many reliable job opportunities.

It seems to me that philosophy and neuroscience go together quite nicely...?

At question is whether philosophy is to take over the task at some point. Not as a speculator on the side but as a primary field.

(2019) Science as we know it can’t explain consciousness – but a philosophical revolution is coming
There is growing suspicion among scientists that conventional scientific methods will never be able to explain consciousness.
https://theconversation.com/science-as- ... ing-126143

While the field parapsychology isn't considered acceptable in the status quo of science today and therefore is widely ignored, research into NDE (near death experience) consciousness research provides evidence of the possibility of consciousness to be independent of the brain.

(2019) Does Consciousness Continue After Brain Flat-line?
How can people brought back from death after cardiac arrest report having experienced lucid and vivid memories and recollections without a functioning brain? The study of near-death experiences is challenging the idea our consciousness originates in the brain.
https://www.sca-aware.org/sca-news/life ... eart-stops

The AWARE—AWAreness during REsuscitation study by Sam Parnia, director of the Human Consciousness Project at the University of Southampton provides evidence that consciousness is independent from the brain and that some people with brain flat line experience remote viewing.

Principled rejection of the possibility that consciousness is external from the brain could be harmful. At least from a philosophical perspective, it seems that it should be considered and explored with urgency.

The CIA has used and developed so called 'remote viewing' with which it is possible to have conscious experience across the earth and into the future.


(2021) How to Escape the Confines of Time and Space According to the CIA
"The takeaway is that human consciousness brought to a sufficiently altered (focused) state could obtain information about the past, present, and future. Wayne reasons that our all-reaching consciousness eventually participates in an infinite continuum. Long after we depart the space-time dimension and the hologram of Universal absolutes (Plato's forms) each one of us perceives is snuffed out, our consciousness continues."
https://www.vice.com/en/article/7k9qag/ ... to-the-cia

The Reality of ESP
A Physicist’s Proof of Psychic Abilities. This book, detailing its author’s many successful investigations into the paranormal, should make those who deny the possible existence of such phenomena think again”. ~ Author Russell Targ, of Palo Alto, California, is a physicist, author, and retired senior staff scientist from Lockheed-Martin.
https://espresearch.com/
https://www.irva.org/ (an organization that intends to secure proper use of remote viewing)

In recent years, there are several new and upcoming consciousness theories that share the idea that consciousness is an external property of the Universe that is 'filtered by the brain'.

According to the decades-long research of Dr. Peter Fenwick (Cambridge, UK), a highly regarded neuropsychologist who has been studying the human brain, consciousness, and the phenomenon of near death experience (NDE) for 50 years consciousness cannot be an emergent property of the brain and its metabolism. Fenwick believes that consciousness actually exists independently and outside of the brain. In Fenwick’s view, the brain does not create or produce consciousness.

(2019) Dr. Peter Fenwick: Consciousness is a property of the Universe that is filtered by the brain
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/bl ... -the-brain

Did you notice my topic about neutrino's and consciousness? It mentions research by consciousness researcher Maurice Goodman from Dublin Institute of Technology.

https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums ... 63#p437763

Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑March 18th, 2023, 10:53 am It seems to me that philosophy and neuroscience go together quite nicely...?

You would be forced to perform within a certain scope (mind-brain correlation) which might not be desired. When the idea that consciousness is 'produced' in the brain is invalid, a lot of resources and time would have been wasted.

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 11:13 pm FYI, My primary interests regarding the topic of consciousness are mainly about how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness.

There are people with just 5% brain tissue that manage to live a normal and healthy live (e.g. as parent with children and a job or as a student that successfully completes a University study).

Consciousness without a brain?
https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums ... =1&t=16742


"Remarkable story of maths genius who had almost no brain

The student was bright, having an IQ of 126.
...
I can't say whether the student had a brain weighing 50 grams or 150 grams, but it is clear it is nowhere near the normal 1.5kg and much of the brain he does have is in the more primitive deep structures that are relatively spared in hydrochephalus"."

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 11:13 pm Hello.

I am currently in the first year of University, and I'm starting to think that my current major isn't really for me. Because of that, I'm considering switching majors on my second year.

I have been, and still am, intrigued by the nature of consciousness, and I would love to study it further while also writing about the topic—outside of just writing about it in online forums that is.

So the question is, in order for me to more effectively pursue these things, would I be better off majoring in Philosophy or Neuroscience?

FYI, My primary interests regarding the topic of consciousness are mainly about how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness.
I am aware that this is closer to philosophy than neuroscience, but on the other hand, I feel that one needs to be proficient in both philosophy of mind AND neuroscience in order to answer these questions fully and in more detail, as I believe that subjective existence and physical/objective existence are inevitably and closely interconnected.

And of course, I'm also taking the job opportunities into consideration. Compared to majoring in neuroscience, majoring in philosophy seems too economically risky just because compared to the former, it doesn't offer as many reliable job opportunities.

What are you currently majoring in?

With regard job prospects. The issue was addressed on the podcast Partially Examined Life: Episode 10 - Kantian Ethics: What Should We Do?

"the amount of anxiety that I had at University because everyone was talking about how impossible it was to get a job, it was tremendous.
...
Philosophy is one of those kind of things that maybe you find that 'this is something that I really love' and I am willing to put up with all the crap that goes into trying to do philosophy professionally, which is, yeah it is really hard to get a job, it is very competitive so you better put all your energy into it to be cooler than anyone in your program, and getting into a very good program in the first place, which means having really good grades and working really hard on a honours thesis or whatever it is that you need to get to get into a good school."
https://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums ... 48#p434548

Despite this history, the situation might be changing rapidly with the emergence of AI (e.g. ChatGPT 4). Logically, social, artistic and moral based capacities will become more valuable than technical knowledge.

It might be that in the near future most jobs will be available for people with a philosophy, artistic or social background with philosophy being the highest paid category of jobs as it would reside 'behind the AI'.

1. Will neuroscience jobs be at risk to be replaced by AI?
2. Will pioneering philosophy jobs be at risk to be replaced by AI?

The latter seems impossible, at least from a current prospect on the future. AI is an extension of human life and cannot be the origin of itself. It is philosophy that drives AI.

(2019) Will artificial intelligence replace doctors?
‘My wife is just graduating and she’s a pathologist.’ So I said, ‘Put away as much money as you can really fast because those jobs are going to be replaced by AI.’ In 2016, a New England Journal of Medicine article predicted that “machine learning will displace much of the work of radiologists and anatomical pathologists,” adding that “AI will soon exceed human accuracy.”
https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/will ... ce-doctors

When all mimicable technical capacities of humans are outdone by AI. What's left that humans can 'add' for value? In my opinion that would be philosophy.

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 11:13 pm Hello.

I am currently in the first year of University, and I'm starting to think that my current major isn't really for me. Because of that, I'm considering switching majors on my second year.

I have been, and still am, intrigued by the nature of consciousness, and I would love to study it further while also writing about the topic—outside of just writing about it in online forums that is.

So the question is, in order for me to more effectively pursue these things, would I be better off majoring in Philosophy or Neuroscience?

FYI, My primary interests regarding the topic of consciousness are mainly about how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness.
I am aware that this is closer to philosophy than neuroscience, but on the other hand, I feel that one needs to be proficient in both philosophy of mind AND neuroscience in order to answer these questions fully and in more detail, as I believe that subjective existence and physical/objective existence are inevitably and closely interconnected.

And of course, I'm also taking the job opportunities into consideration. Compared to majoring in neuroscience, majoring in philosophy seems too economically risky just because compared to the former, it doesn't offer as many reliable job opportunities.

Are you planning to work in your field of study? In other words are you looking at University as job training? If not, then major in whichever you prefer. If so, you'll need a doctorate degree to work in your field. Are you up for that? I agree that with a doctorate there are more jobs in neuroscience, but many of them are in academia. Are you interested in grant writing? I certainly was not and I suspect few are.

Good luck.

value wrote: ↑March 19th, 2023, 3:44 am What are you currently majoring in?

I'm currently majoring in Computer Science. One of the reason I chose this major was because of the rapid—and almost exponential—technological growth the world has been experiencing recently, as I felt like it was required for me to learn this field of knowledge that moves the world forward if I were to survive and make my way into the world in the future.

Another reason was because I wanted to be a part of the A.I industry. I saw just how much potential it had and was certain that A.Is would change everything. As they say, "If you can't beat them, join them." In a naive way, I wanted to play some kind of role in this upcoming new era. And I just didn't want to be left behind.

value wrote: ↑March 19th, 2023, 3:44 am The latter seems impossible, at least from a current prospect on the future. AI is an extension of human life and cannot be the origin of itself. It is philosophy that drives AI.

value wrote: ↑March 19th, 2023, 3:44 am When all mimicable technical capacities of humans are outdone by AI. What's left that humans can 'add' for value? In my opinion that would be philosophy.

I suppose it is true that philosophy underlays anything that can be analyzed in terms of philosophy. Being knowledgeable in the philosophy behind the inner logic of A.I would certainly be useful when it comes to creating and improving them. Though, at the same time, I would say that the material world of technology also holds as much power over the mental or philosophical world as well—given how a large part of philosophy is a description of the physical world.

However, your comments are still much appreciated, as they have reminded me that there is still something that I'm good at which I could make use of in this day and age. I personally think that the philosophy of mind would play an important role in creating the blueprint behind sentient Artificial Consciousness.

Though speaking of which, while I suppose it is also true that A.I does not yet possess a philosopher's mind, I imagine that once it gains sentience, which I assume it will at some point (as I'm not one to underestimate human curiosity), the A.Is would also be able to philosophize in a way similar but also different to ourselves.

LuckyR wrote: ↑March 20th, 2023, 1:25 am

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 11:13 pm Hello.

I am currently in the first year of University, and I'm starting to think that my current major isn't really for me. Because of that, I'm considering switching majors on my second year.

I have been, and still am, intrigued by the nature of consciousness, and I would love to study it further while also writing about the topic—outside of just writing about it in online forums that is.

So the question is, in order for me to more effectively pursue these things, would I be better off majoring in Philosophy or Neuroscience?

FYI, My primary interests regarding the topic of consciousness are mainly about how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness.
I am aware that this is closer to philosophy than neuroscience, but on the other hand, I feel that one needs to be proficient in both philosophy of mind AND neuroscience in order to answer these questions fully and in more detail, as I believe that subjective existence and physical/objective existence are inevitably and closely interconnected.

And of course, I'm also taking the job opportunities into consideration. Compared to majoring in neuroscience, majoring in philosophy seems too economically risky just because compared to the former, it doesn't offer as many reliable job opportunities.

Are you planning to work in your field of study? In other words are you looking at University as job training? If not, then major in whichever you prefer. If so, you'll need a doctorate degree to work in your field. Are you up for that? I agree that with a doctorate there are more jobs in neuroscience, but many of them are in academia. Are you interested in grant writing? I certainly was not and I suspect few are.

Good luck.

Yes, I am planning to work in my field of study, and I am aware that especially for areas like philosophy or neuroscience, working in my field of study would require a doctorate degree. So far I am up for that choice, if the major is something that I am truly passionate about.

But it does concern me a little that I may not be able to get a major-related job (or a well-paying job in general) during the years of studying for the doctorate degree. I certainly don't know if I would like grant writing, but I imagine when it comes to majoring in neuroscience, I would be down to work as some sort of an assistant researcher in a lab.

As for majoring in philosophy, I'll have to think more about what jobs I could get from doing that.

I could be a professor, a blogger, or an author, though I would usually prefer getting jobs that are closely related to my field of study. Although, I imagine there are a lot of jobs out there that are only slightly related to philosophy, yet at the same time give you a good amount of advantage if you were to major in philosophy.

Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑March 18th, 2023, 10:53 am It seems to me that philosophy and neuroscience go together quite nicely...?

Yep, I've thought about majoring in either one of them and getting a minor in the other area too, and it remains as another strong possibility. I don't know if I would be able to handle having two majors, however.

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:16 pm I'm currently majoring in Computer Science. One of the reason I chose this major was because of the rapid—and almost exponential—technological growth the world has been experiencing recently, as I felt like it was required for me to learn this field of knowledge that moves the world forward if I were to survive and make my way into the world in the future.

Another reason was because I wanted to be a part of the A.I industry. I saw just how much potential it had and was certain that A.Is would change everything. As they say, "If you can't beat them, join them." In a naive way, I wanted to play some kind of role in this upcoming new era. And I just didn't want to be left behind.

I understand from your reply that you are naturally capable of doing almost anything with as diverse a scope as majoring in computer science (AI) or neuroscience. Such a capacity might be of advantage in philosophy since philosophy can investigate questions that span multiple fields and connect the dots to create theories that may suit your described interest scope "how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness".

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:16 pm

value wrote: ↑March 19th, 2023, 3:44 am It is philosophy that drives AI.
...
When all mimicable technical capacities of humans are outdone by AI. What's left that humans can 'add' for value? In my opinion that would be philosophy.

I suppose it is true that philosophy underlays anything that can be analyzed in terms of philosophy. Being knowledgeable in the philosophy behind the inner logic of A.I would certainly be useful when it comes to creating and improving them. Though, at the same time, I would say that the material world of technology also holds as much power over the mental or philosophical world as well—given how a large part of philosophy is a description of the physical world.

However, your comments are still much appreciated, as they have reminded me that there is still something that I'm good at which I could make use of in this day and age. I personally think that the philosophy of mind would play an important role in creating the blueprint behind sentient Artificial Consciousness.

GitHub (owned by Microsoft) released a GPT-4 AI powered Co-pilot that enables whole software to be automatically written based on a simple few sentence logical description of the desired program. While it currently enables senior software engineers to save massive amounts of time (90% time saving and the abolishing of junior engineer jobs), once matured in GPT-5-6-7 the software developer may become obsolete and all that is required to create software would be philosophy or 'creative ideas'.

(Gut feeling based) creativity and art may be said to underlay creative ideas however it would be philosophy that would enable to touch the essence of that creativity with theory which would be required to steer AI.

Currently in business a lot is done based on gut feeling and philosophy (the capacity to create wisdom through theory) has a high regard as most business people intuitively feel that philosophy can be used to both discover and describe the wisdom behind what is done. Business science is essentially for a large part based on philosophy. While people in business are able to create success naturally most love to see philosophy touch the essence of the path to success through theory.

In the future when AI is taking over most mimicable technical capacity of humans the capacity to excel in philosophy (the professional creation of wisdom) to steer AI might become the primary aspect by which humans can qualitatively distinguish themselves. Therefore philosophy might become one of the highest paid jobs in the future.

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:16 pmThough speaking of which, while I suppose it is also true that A.I does not yet possess a philosopher's mind, I imagine that once it gains sentience, which I assume it will at some point (as I'm not one to underestimate human curiosity), the A.Is would also be able to philosophize in a way similar but also different to ourselves.

I do not agree. I do not believe that humans can 'harness' or master life itself or that there is a mere clue that such is possible. In my opinion life forms are at most possible to serve life.

"An attempt to stand above life, as being life, results in a figurative stone that sinks in the ocean of time."

Perhaps it would be possible for machines or AI to become actually alive (e.g. through neutrino interaction when neutrino's would be the origin of life) but there are several questions concerning the actual possibility since it might not be a wholly technical matter (e.g. 'connect the neutrinos to a mechanical port'). Questions like "why would a neutrino want to interact?" and "what would the concept 'health' mean to a human made tool 'machine'?" might become applicable.

Philosophy can start today as a pioneer to address those questions and when time comes it can have a place upfront to provide solutions.

value wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2023, 5:04 am

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:16 pm I'm currently majoring in Computer Science. One of the reason I chose this major was because of the rapid—and almost exponential—technological growth the world has been experiencing recently, as I felt like it was required for me to learn this field of knowledge that moves the world forward if I were to survive and make my way into the world in the future.

Another reason was because I wanted to be a part of the A.I industry. I saw just how much potential it had and was certain that A.Is would change everything. As they say, "If you can't beat them, join them." In a naive way, I wanted to play some kind of role in this upcoming new era. And I just didn't want to be left behind.

I understand from your reply that you are naturally capable of doing almost anything with as diverse a scope as majoring in computer science (AI) or neuroscience. Such a capacity might be of advantage in philosophy since philosophy can investigate questions that span multiple fields and connect the dots to create theories that may suit your described interest scope "how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness".

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:16 pm

value wrote: ↑March 19th, 2023, 3:44 am It is philosophy that drives AI.
...
When all mimicable technical capacities of humans are outdone by AI. What's left that humans can 'add' for value? In my opinion that would be philosophy.

I suppose it is true that philosophy underlays anything that can be analyzed in terms of philosophy. Being knowledgeable in the philosophy behind the inner logic of A.I would certainly be useful when it comes to creating and improving them. Though, at the same time, I would say that the material world of technology also holds as much power over the mental or philosophical world as well—given how a large part of philosophy is a description of the physical world.

However, your comments are still much appreciated, as they have reminded me that there is still something that I'm good at which I could make use of in this day and age. I personally think that the philosophy of mind would play an important role in creating the blueprint behind sentient Artificial Consciousness.

GitHub (owned by Microsoft) released a GPT-4 AI powered Co-pilot that enables whole software to be automatically written based on a simple few sentence logical description of the desired program. While it currently enables senior software engineers to save massive amounts of time (90% time saving and the abolishing of junior engineer jobs), once matured in GPT-5-6-7 the software developer may become obsolete and all that is required to create software would be philosophy or 'creative ideas'.

(Gut feeling based) creativity and art may be said to underlay creative ideas however it would be philosophy that would enable to touch the essence of that creativity with theory which would be required to steer AI.

Currently in business a lot is done based on gut feeling and philosophy (the capacity to create wisdom through theory) has a high regard as most business people intuitively feel that philosophy can be used to both discover and describe the wisdom behind what is done. Business science is essentially for a large part based on philosophy. While people in business are able to create success naturally most love to see philosophy touch the essence of the path to success through theory.

In the future when AI is taking over most mimicable technical capacity of humans the capacity to excel in philosophy (the professional creation of wisdom) to steer AI might become the primary aspect by which humans can qualitatively distinguish themselves. Therefore philosophy might become one of the highest paid jobs in the future.

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:16 pmThough speaking of which, while I suppose it is also true that A.I does not yet possess a philosopher's mind, I imagine that once it gains sentience, which I assume it will at some point (as I'm not one to underestimate human curiosity), the A.Is would also be able to philosophize in a way similar but also different to ourselves.

I do not agree. I do not believe that humans can 'harness' or master life itself or that there is a mere clue that such is possible. In my opinion life forms are at most possible to serve life.

"An attempt to stand above life, as being life, results in a figurative stone that sinks in the ocean of time."

Perhaps it would be possible for machines or AI to become actually alive (e.g. through neutrino interaction when neutrino's would be the origin of life) but there are several questions concerning the actual possibility since it might not be a wholly technical matter (e.g. 'connect the neutrinos to a mechanical port'). Questions like "why would a neutrino want to interact?" and "what would the concept 'health' mean to a human made tool 'machine'?" might become applicable.

Philosophy can start today as a pioneer to address those questions and when time comes it can have a place upfront to provide solutions.

What jobs do you think would be best suited for propagating these philosophies to the mass? A public speaker? An author? Or perhaps a professor? Having a good philosophy on these topics is one thing, but making many people know about it is just as important if I were to leave an impact using my philosophy.

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2023, 8:40 am What jobs do you think would be best suited for propagating these philosophies to the mass? A public speaker? An author? Or perhaps a professor? Having a good philosophy on these topics is one thing, but making many people know about it is just as important if I were to leave an impact using my philosophy.

Those questions might best be asked to a professor with a perspective on the future of the field. A professor who may be able to advise you is Gregg Caruso (State University of New York) who co-authored a book on free will with well known professor Daniel C. Dennett: https://debatingfreewill.com/

Gregg Caruso published the following article about the study of philosophy yesterday:

(2023) Optimism about Philosophy
I think the future of philosophy is strong. There is more interesting and diverse work being done today in philosophy than perhaps ever before. In fact, I can barely keep up with all the excellent work being done in areas of philosophy that never previously existed.

The days of philosophy being dominated by one or two figures (or methodologies) at a time is over, and I think that’s a good thing. Let a thousand flowers bloom, as they say.
https://dailynous.com/2023/03/21/optimi ... hilosophy/

Contact information:
http://www.greggcaruso.com/

Gregg Caruso is an advocate for determinism and the abolishment of retributive justice. A book he published in 2019 is Rejecting Retributivism: Free Will, Punishment, and Criminal Justice (Law and the Cognitive Sciences)

An article in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews:

(2019) Free Will Skepticism in Law and Society: Challenging Retributive Justice Source
https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/free-will-s ... e-justice/

For the record: I am on the side of a defence of free will and I have also addressed the subject retributive justice as part of it. I noticed his article about the future of philosophy yesterday.

With regard future jobs and since you studied AI. Do you see a role for philosophy in that field?

value wrote: ↑March 19th, 2023, 3:44 am What are you currently majoring in?

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:16 pm I'm currently majoring in Computer Science. One of the reason I chose this major was because of the rapid—and almost exponential—technological growth the world has been experiencing recently, as I felt like it was required for me to learn this field of knowledge that moves the world forward if I were to survive and make my way into the world in the future.

Another reason was because I wanted to be a part of the A.I industry. I saw just how much potential it had and was certain that A.Is would change everything. As they say, "If you can't beat them, join them." In a naive way, I wanted to play some kind of role in this upcoming new era. And I just didn't want to be left behind.

If you were to continue on your current path — which I understand as learning to be a (software) Designer — I think philosophy would be the most useful and helpful addition. A true designer — not just someone who cranks out code — is dedicated to their profession, and to getting better at it, in every way. On that path, Computer Science is the basis, but almost every other existing field of study can play a useful and helpful role.

A man called Richard P. Gabriel has something to say about this, in "RPG’s Writing Broadside". I think it is helpful to designers as well as the "Scientists" he references, and probably to many other occupations and professions too

Richard P. Gabriel wrote: Advice for Scientists

• Your profession includes writing, so learn how to write. No one is naturally talented enough to get by on instinct alone.
• Study writing by reading books on writing. I suggest "Style: Toward Clarity and Grace," by Joseph M. Williams.
• Study writing by reading good writers, and not just science writers. Read Knuth but also John McPhee and Rick Bass. Try to understand how they do it. Think about the good writing you read.
• Learn proper grammar; there are zillions of books on grammar.
• Get a couple of good dictionaries and use them. I have about a half dozen I use routinely. Some poets look up every single word in their poems to make sure they are using language accurately.
• Learn to revise and edit; there are books on this, but I suggest workshops.
• Read poetry. Nothing teaches you better the power of good writing and the skills to write compressed sentences. Poetry workshops are full of fiction and essay writers who are there to learn language skills.
• Practice writing. Write every day. If you are a top-notch computer scientist, you probably read technical papers nearly every day. You are a writer too, so practice.
• Workshop your writing. Writers learn by workshopping. Every night across the country writers sit in groups of 3 to 20, reading and critiquing each other’s work. Not only are these professional writers but amateurs who simply want to improve their diaries.

Design is much more than writing, of course, but this (above) helps to illustrate how many diverse areas of study contribute to the designer's profession/vocation.

value wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2023, 11:02 am

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 23rd, 2023, 8:40 am What jobs do you think would be best suited for propagating these philosophies to the mass? A public speaker? An author? Or perhaps a professor? Having a good philosophy on these topics is one thing, but making many people know about it is just as important if I were to leave an impact using my philosophy.

Those questions might best be asked to a professor with a perspective on the future of the field. A professor who may be able to advise you is Gregg Caruso (State University of New York) who co-authored a book on free will with well known professor Daniel C. Dennett: https://debatingfreewill.com/

Gregg Caruso published the following article about the study of philosophy yesterday:

(2023) Optimism about Philosophy
I think the future of philosophy is strong. There is more interesting and diverse work being done today in philosophy than perhaps ever before. In fact, I can barely keep up with all the excellent work being done in areas of philosophy that never previously existed.

The days of philosophy being dominated by one or two figures (or methodologies) at a time is over, and I think that’s a good thing. Let a thousand flowers bloom, as they say.
https://dailynous.com/2023/03/21/optimi ... hilosophy/

Contact information:
http://www.greggcaruso.com/

Gregg Caruso is an advocate for determinism and the abolishment of retributive justice. A book he published in 2019 is Rejecting Retributivism: Free Will, Punishment, and Criminal Justice (Law and the Cognitive Sciences)

An article in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews:

(2019) Free Will Skepticism in Law and Society: Challenging Retributive Justice Source
https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/free-will-s ... e-justice/

For the record: I am on the side of a defence of free will and I have also addressed the subject retributive justice as part of it. I noticed his article about the future of philosophy yesterday.

With regard future jobs and since you studied AI. Do you see a role for philosophy in that field?

Thank you for the resources.

And yes, as I have said, I do see a role for philosophy in the field of A.I even aside from all the sentient A.I stuff, such as the ethics behind how to manage the A.I's impacts on society, as well as whether it is logical to have ourselves rely more and more on technologies like this.

As is the nature of philosophy—it is the most practical when it comes to asking "must we do this / must we let this happen?" or "if so, then by how much?", etc. I imagine philosophy will become more important as more things (technologies, systems etc) develop and more events happen in this world, as then we would naturally be provided with more very important issues to think about, issues that could decide the whole course of humanity.

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 7:26 pm

LuckyR wrote: ↑March 20th, 2023, 1:25 am

GrayArea wrote: ↑March 16th, 2023, 11:13 pm Hello.

I am currently in the first year of University, and I'm starting to think that my current major isn't really for me. Because of that, I'm considering switching majors on my second year.

I have been, and still am, intrigued by the nature of consciousness, and I would love to study it further while also writing about the topic—outside of just writing about it in online forums that is.

So the question is, in order for me to more effectively pursue these things, would I be better off majoring in Philosophy or Neuroscience?

FYI, My primary interests regarding the topic of consciousness are mainly about how consciousness is formed / what causes subjective experience, the relationship between subjective and objective experience, as well as what causes self-awareness.
I am aware that this is closer to philosophy than neuroscience, but on the other hand, I feel that one needs to be proficient in both philosophy of mind AND neuroscience in order to answer these questions fully and in more detail, as I believe that subjective existence and physical/objective existence are inevitably and closely interconnected.

And of course, I'm also taking the job opportunities into consideration. Compared to majoring in neuroscience, majoring in philosophy seems too economically risky just because compared to the former, it doesn't offer as many reliable job opportunities.

Are you planning to work in your field of study? In other words are you looking at University as job training? If not, then major in whichever you prefer. If so, you'll need a doctorate degree to work in your field. Are you up for that? I agree that with a doctorate there are more jobs in neuroscience, but many of them are in academia. Are you interested in grant writing? I certainly was not and I suspect few are.

Good luck.

Yes, I am planning to work in my field of study, and I am aware that especially for areas like philosophy or neuroscience, working in my field of study would require a doctorate degree. So far I am up for that choice, if the major is something that I am truly passionate about.

But it does concern me a little that I may not be able to get a major-related job (or a well-paying job in general) during the years of studying for the doctorate degree. I certainly don't know if I would like grant writing, but I imagine when it comes to majoring in neuroscience, I would be down to work as some sort of an assistant researcher in a lab.

As for majoring in philosophy, I'll have to think more about what jobs I could get from doing that.

I could be a professor, a blogger, or an author, though I would usually prefer getting jobs that are closely related to my field of study. Although, I imagine there are a lot of jobs out there that are only slightly related to philosophy, yet at the same time give you a good amount of advantage if you were to major in philosophy.

Interesting. Are you a lab rat by nature? I ask because there is a very big difference in the practice of the two areas (bench top research vs library "research" and paper writing). To be honest they tend to attract very different personality types. The answer lies within your understanding of yourself.