US universities/colleges still suck

[Kidlicious]

USA! USA!

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pekka
Yeah. so? Day dreaming. It's cool, don't get me wrong. But face value is what?

What I described in the post above: a significant contribution in the collective mentalities (often, that which originated in philosophers' minds will be in everybody's brain a few generations later). For example, philosophy is the main reason why we live in societies that give you a freedom of speech, without which the Intenrnet would be meaningless.

Also, Philosphy has some minor academic use in the field of human sciences.

[:) Smiley]

Originally posted by Pekka
Let's give up philosophy and bring out the weed, because it has more credentials being a real substance.

420!

[Kidlicious]

Hasn't philosophy contributed to computer science? I don't know much about either, but I seem to remember someone saying so.

[Pekka]

Sure. No problemo. And Mud Throwing made our ancestors warmer and were the first steps to society. Mudding the huts that is. The Art Of Lactating was also good, giving nutrition to babies. What I'm saying is, it's not totally irrelevant, but compare to CS and what's happening right now, it's laughable suggestion that it would actually compete in contributions now.

Philosophers haven't come up with anything new in ages. Except with conservatives with conscience. That card is played already.

[Pekka]

Kid, sure.. why not. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, or hasn't given anything to anyone. I'm saying, right now and in the future, CS is where it's at, when talkinga bout contributions to the world. To deny this is to die without honour.

[Kidlicious]

Pekka,

Sure, but each discipline is important. We can't all concentrate on Computer Science. That wouldn't be very productive.

[Pekka]

Yes true, but my point is, when it comes to academics etc, the ones who should be treated like criminals is art majors.

[Kidlicious]

[Asher]

Computer Science will eventually make philosophy obsolete, once we finish making The Matrix.

[aneeshm]

I'm with Asher and Pekka here .

Look at it this way - when philosophers are of the right kind , they get out of the way of the scientists and technicians , and let them do the job of advancing science and civilisation . When they are bad , they hinder progress . Thus , the effects philosophers have had on society have , for the most part , been usually negative , thanks to them giving intellectual credence to junk .

Computer scientists , on the other hand , have enhanced the quality of human life tremendoucly almost everywhere .

Another important point is the assumption that "people skills" are some sarcosanct value , never to be questioned . It is not a doctor with "people skills" who saves lives - it is one who is technically competent . **How would you feel about driving a car designed by a team of people chosen for "people skills" , versus one designed by nerds/geeks/(negative asocial stereotype) who were geniuses in car design ?

I'd rather have a person who has no "people skills" , but gets the job done , done well , and done well on time when asked , than a person with great "people skills" but no ( or very little , or even just average ) ability . **If your life depended on it , wouldn't you ?

A telling case in point is this discussion itself - you can have it without philosphers ( though then the topic would not have come up ) , but not without the computer scientists who designed the systems that made it possible .











The two "**" mark two questions , the answers to which will demonstrate the credibility of my opponents' arguments to us and the rest of the readers of this thread . If unanswered , the meaning will be clear - my opponents have no anser to give , and thus do not have much of a case , either .

And though I am not a native English speaker , and I do make the occasional typing mistake , I at least try to use the language correctly . This coming from a science student in high school . And I thought philosophy taught you to be ( at the very least ) careful in your wording and precise about the uses of words . I think you need to learn some grammar - from a highschooler .

[Asher]

People skills are still important, but it largely depends on your role on the team. Software development, at least, is a team process. You need to be able to work well and communicate well with others. "Primadonna Programmers" are useful only at the lowest level of the hierarchy, when they're given a task and that's it.

As for English...in my experience, computer science majors are unusually good at English. I think it relates to having to "get it right the first time" with syntax and structure in a program, and it translates from a language like C++ to a language like English.

[Kidlicious]

Some of you guys think that they only purpose in life is making and playing with gadgets. That's pretty sad really.

[Asher]

Who thinks that?

Computer Science is more about playing with gadgets.

Think about that next time you're in a car accident and your car is that much safer than they were 30 years ago, or the next time you go to the bank to withdraw money, or the next time you go to the doctor and get prescribed some medication...

These "gadgets" have become part of everyday life for regular people, and essential tools to furthering scientific understanding in virtually every field.

[St Leo]

There is no inherent purpose in life. The individual can pick any purpose they like and adopt it as theirs.