Live data from Hacker News

The revenge of the philosophy majors

nytimes.com

161–170 of 292 posts

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#161

In summary, AI has tricked a bunch of philosophy majors into not only thinking it's more than linear algebra but changing their entire life trajectories because of their confusion. AI seems to be a very alluring tar pit for the non-technical. The sad part is how this negative externality of AI is being actively encouraged for political ends.

> In summary, AI has tricked a bunch of philosophy majors ...

OTOH, their bank accounts is likely not complaining very loudly

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#162
post #70
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bit of a tangent, but it's fun to think about how much it takes to become a -er, -ian or -ist in a given field. Philosophy is probably one of the hardest, you need to be seen as up there with the all-time greats. In history or physics you probably need to be faculty, in economics you need to have a PhD, in engineering you don't even need a degree but you need to be practicing,...

> you need to be seen as up there with the all-time greats when in school i hung out with a lot of architecture students. They were all told and taught that they will be the next Frank Lloyd Wright or a failure. Then they graduate and end up getting a job drawing construction documents for Taco Bell. Heh they're a pretty jaded bunch.

Still an “architect” though.

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#163

In summary, AI has tricked a bunch of philosophy majors into not only thinking it's more than linear algebra but changing their entire life trajectories because of their confusion. AI seems to be a very alluring tar pit for the non-technical. The sad part is how this negative externality of AI is being actively encouraged for political ends.

Sure, but is there any evidence that psychology and for that matter, any animal intelligence, is anything more than linear algebra?

I think the main problem is whether intelligence is a computable function (or at least approximable by ones, like AIXI is), and then whether it's of the form that NNs implement (linear algebras plus sigmoids and all that jazz).

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have one area of my education that I highly value but its very hard to explain without people importing a lot of assumptions. I like to call it critical listening but also its textual evaluation. In addition to some didactic instruction my Father gave me a short book on the principles of hermeneutics around 13. We went to different churches over the years growing up but I would bring my bible, take notes, and on th…

To my ear, that sounds very much like the GRE Verbal.

I think that's a generally fair statement. I understand its historically pretty common to see a theology to law pipeline.

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#165
post #111
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think any English language post about philosophy majors should be assumed to be about analytics. >how to clarify your thoughts, say what you mean in precise terms, and make clear arguments This is a little generous. Analytic philosophy often comes across as people using heinous amounts of ink to argue whether a hot dog is technically a taco all while pretending that only a fool would even consider what it tastes li…

> I think any English language post about philosophy majors should be assumed to be about analytics. I don't think this is true at all. To start with, there's roughly 2000 years between the earliest known philosophers and the analytic-continental split. Plenty of philosophy majors can and do get really into the ancients or medieval philosophers or whatever and complete their degrees without doing much more than a cur…

I have to disagree here. The split is not incidental, and studying medieval/ancient philosophy naturally means that you are going to concern yourself with Ontology, which is expressely ignored by the “analytic” tradition. If you come to ancient philosophy through your typical post-quinian formal reasoning education, you are going to view such ontology with the weight of thousands of years of translation which you will not realize contains its own tradition and its own truth. You will be stuck in a very narrow, and, frankly, uncritical interpretation. It was Hegel’s fundamental insight (into Kant) that any epistemology fundamentally requires the enclosure of the problem of ontology; that, on account of the schema, the entire Critique of Pure Reason is such an enclosure—-but we cannot genuinely go beyond such an enclosure if we view everything from within it, ie “analytically.”

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#168
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

there is no reason to be this rude edit: okay, considering im downvoted more than you, apparently you should be more rude. lesson learned.

You're not being downvoted because you're wrong, but because the general rule of thumb is that replies should be _more interesting_ than what is being replied too.

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#169

I have an undergrad in Philosophy. Our required math classes were formal logic, which we shared with the comp sci. majors. Those classes basically taught me how to program. I am now a senior engineer at a F500 and I just have a BA in Phil. It is a highly underrated degree, and going forward with knowledge specialization becoming unnecessary, and eventually unfeasible due to the triviality of AI making it not needed f…

One of the best programmers I have ever met/worked with had a degree in philosophy, having started in the computer industry before there was widespread adoption of it as a formal subject --- he is one of only two people I've ever met outside of TeX User's Group Conferences who had read TAoCP (and kept a well-thumbed set of the first 3 volumes on a shelf at his desk).

Really miss working with him, but he has since moved on to better things in his choice of locale.

Re: The revenge of the philosophy majors

#170
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Philosophy majors. That piece of paper does not make you a philosopher.

Bit of a tangent, but it's fun to think about how much it takes to become a -er, -ian or -ist in a given field. Philosophy is probably one of the hardest, you need to be seen as up there with the all-time greats. In history or physics you probably need to be faculty, in economics you need to have a PhD, in engineering you don't even need a degree but you need to be practicing,...

Someone did quote me on bash.org once as having said: Wanting a man who doesn't smell is like wanting a woman who doesn't talk.
Post reply on HN