After much thought I determined that the department I was in was doing me no good and I don't give a damn rather it makes me more eligible for certain jobs or not. I want to go to college and graduate a scholar. Not some processed business student.

So I just thought I would share that with you and you can be sure you'll see me on this board much more ;)

As for emphasis I have not yet decided but it will likely relate to the colonial age of either Britain or Spain. Or possibly some study on naval combat in that period. I was also thinking that with colonialism i could tie in the business classes i have taken if I emphasize the economic aspects to the various exploits. Spanish colonialism here in California may be an interesting scope and according to my department chair it has not been touched on too extensively.

Anyways we'll see as I begin taking classes, theres just so much that interests me. If any of you guys are in the department at Cal Poly let me know, we'll get a beer!

and.....no one cares... alright...

Congrats! :goodjob:

I look forward to you breaking down some colonial economics here for us. Something I'm quite keen on myself :D

Congratulations.

Early into my first semester of sophomore year at Notre Dame, I realized that business bored me to tears. Job opportunities or no job opportunities, I was determined to study what I love. I'm graduating in May and I love studying history. I am specializing in US history although I would have liked to do Middle East or precolombian America.

Anyway, there are jobs out there for history majors.

Good for you! :goodjob:

The world may not credit this, but it needs more historians.

I am soon to be a CIS Computer Networking major. But Congrats, and I agree with Verbose's statements about historians.

I agree that Spanish Colonialism in California sounds interesting ;) Do you speak Spanish already? I imagine you do, but if you don't, start studying, cuz you will have to read those texts in the source language.

Cpngrats, (although for someone like me who does not know the American educational system it is quite unclear what exactly you have done... ;))

but congrats anyways... mitsho

Isn't it illegal to say you are a history major when in fact you haven't even started the course yet. :p

Well, I almost congradulated you, but then I thought, what is the highschool freshmen that is really supposed to be in 8th grade congradulating an at least 21 year old college student?

don't know you but hey congratulations!

I admire that sort of thing; the world needs more Renaissance Men. I would love to study history and physics as well as engineering, but I can't live my whole life at school!

I second the assertion that there are plenty of jobs for history majors.

i might, in gead school get a degree in music history, but thats a little different...

Wow, goes from no replies to like 12!

Thanks for the warm welcome. I do feel very good about it and yes I do speak Spanish but I'm still debating my emphasis...so much to choose from.

I feel smarter already...

I'm puzzled - is it common to change subjects in the middle like this, at American universities? I'm sure it's not in Britain. I only ever knew one person who did that, in her first year, and it was very difficult for her to do so (but she was prepared to do anything to escape Theology - probably wise!).

I am starting college in January and stuck between the choices of business and history. Business for the job oppurtunities and history because I like it. Its hard, because I don't want to be a teacher, and what else can you be with a history degree. I am afraid that you who say that there are lots of jobs for history majors are wishfu thinkers.

Yay, congrats! And welcome to the club. There are never too many humanists in the world.

No, not humanist, H-I-S-T-O-R-I-A-N :D

No, not humanist, H-I-S-T-O-R-I-A-N :D
In Finland historians are considered to be humanists :p

I am no where near college but I have a question:

IF you major in History do you actually pick a time period of history for a class?

Good luck feeding yourself :p

I'm puzzled - is it common to change subjects in the middle like this, at American universities? I'm sure it's not in Britain. I only ever knew one person who did that, in her first year, and it was very difficult for her to do so (but she was prepared to do anything to escape Theology - probably wise!).

Actually, a lot of colleges let you go a full year without declaring a major at all.

That seems extraordinary.

I've had to teach undergraduates this year for the first time and was amazed to discover that many of them are not actually doing this subject (this is an Asian university, apparently modelled in part on the US system). In fact, most of the best students seem to be from other faculties entirely!

It seems puzzling to me, as I can't see how you can get a proper grounding in a subject if half the time you're doing courses in entirely different subjects - all of which, presumably, are just introductory courses. Doesn't it make everyone a jack of all trades but master of none?

Congrats on picking History as your major. I really wanted to do History but I went with Law instead since most Law Firms prefer you to have done that as your degree :) However, I've heard that History is welcomed at lower levels by Law Firms as it demonstrates an ability to research.

Look forward to another Historian on CFC. I don't often post on the history threads as I bow to the superior knowledge of others, but I do enjoy reading about it.

Good Luck :goodjob:

"I am starting college in January and stuck between the choices of business and history. Business for the job oppurtunities and history because I like it."

Do business. Trust me as a former college student, doing something you love is fine for the four (or more) years you go to college, but unless you get a Masters and then a PhD, opportunities will be ummm...limited.

Business will make you a lving while history is a good hobby.

@Plotinus: I entered the U of Toronto last year intending to study economics. I did an undefined first year in humanities and social sciences (economics, Greek history, modern history, psychology, and French), and decided early on to do philosophy and history instead. Then I relocated here to McGill, did this semester as an honours philosophy/history major (two philosophy, two history, and a literature class) and am switching (hopefully with some finality) my history component to honours Italian. In short, switching is relatively easy, and done by many. I know people who transfer between faculties, or do a year of physics and math and decide to switch to philosophy. This is mostly because the program requirements are highly discrete, being based on courses instead of modules. So, for example, the philosophy program here requires that I complete certain specified classes, and certain others from an accepted list, but not a cohesive program of study in it. The closest we come is to require a program thesis seminar in fourth year.

And to answer your question, yes, it does.

In England the only requirement Philosophy has is that you must have been turned down by all other classes first ;) Clearing course if ever I have heard of one.

Really? Weird.

"I am starting college in January and stuck between the choices of business and history. Business for the job oppurtunities and history because I like it."

Do business. Trust me as a former college student, doing something you love is fine for the four (or more) years you go to college, but unless you get a Masters and then a PhD, opportunities will be ummm...limited.

Business will make you a lving while history is a good hobby.
Thanks for the advice :)

"I am starting college in January and stuck between the choices of business and history. Business for the job oppurtunities and history because I like it."

Do business. Trust me as a former college student, doing something you love is fine for the four (or more) years you go to college, but unless you get a Masters and then a PhD, opportunities will be ummm...limited.

Business will make you a lving while history is a good hobby.


If you knew anything about business departments at universities or the business industries, you would know how unfounded your statement is. Clearly you don't because you made the statement, proof in itself. Let me enlighten you.

A degree from a college is a piece of paper. You don't neccessarily learn anything and you certainly don't come out as a business master. If you want to know about how to run a business work for a few, then try starting one. I don't care about career outlook because I make all of my money, ALL OF IT, from my business that I started with little help from the blathering proffesors at my college, they would have me working for some victicrat foundation against capitalism if they had it their way.

However if you pursue a degree with the intention of becoming enlightened and well rounded and educated, it will show in your conversations, the way you interview, your writting skills and demeanor. Not to mention appreciation for how things are, why they are the way they are and how they work. History for me is an interest and therefore the perfect medium to help me understand the world around me.If sociology, business (the college sense of the word, clearly no application in my mind) or science is your interest, than through that medium you are accomplishing the similar task, that will make you an enlightened individual.

Businesses would hire me with my history degree, because I achieved a degree that made me understand the world around me and I'll make that clear to them. Additionally my experience in the interships I've had as well as my writting skills and application skills demonstrated through starting my own successful business, will insure that I am an excellent candidate for a leadership role.

So to those of you who say good luck eating, I'll be fine trust me. You'll be okay too, with you bachelors in business you'll land that assistant management position at Red Lobster and get lots of free meals.

:lol:

Probably the best post on this thread.

It seems puzzling to me, as I can't see how you can get a proper grounding in a subject if half the time you're doing courses in entirely different subjects - all of which, presumably, are just introductory courses. Doesn't it make everyone a jack of all trades but master of none?

Each major has very specific courses that must be completed before the degree is awarded. Besides, at least here, most of the first-year classes are the same for at least all of the engineering majors, and some of the others, too. No matter your major, you are required to take two semesters of English, a history course or two, lab science (bio/chem/physics), a computer science class, and a ton of calculus. I don't start the serious nuclear engineering classes until junior year; the only nuke course I take as a freshman is the intro course. So, as long as you've decided on a major by the end of your first year, there's no problem. If you wait longer, though, you'll probably need to take five or six years to graduate instead of four.

Really? Weird.

I don't think he was serious. At any rate, I didn't get turned down by anyone for anything before being accepted for any of my Philosophy degrees.

I've had to teach undergraduates this year for the first time and was amazed to discover that many of them are not actually doing this subject (this is an Asian university, apparently modelled in part on the US system). In fact, most of the best students seem to be from other faculties entirely!I hope you haven't been teaching them about how British culture is soooo superior to others and therefore worth embracing / enforcing. I was really disappointed to read your comments in that British Empire chat we had, given your qualifications and position. If you were teaching me that, and I was your undergraduate, I'd ask for someone else. Seriously. I mean it as good, clean, honest advice.

It seems puzzling to me, as I can't see how you can get a proper grounding in a subject if half the time you're doing courses in entirely different subjects - all of which, presumably, are just introductory courses. Doesn't it make everyone a jack of all trades but master of none?That's the US system. They don't specialise nearly as much as Brits do, and the difference kicks in at A-level stage.

I've fluctuated in a similar manner.

-First it was mathematical sociology (because I read a book about it and didn't know any better!)
-Then it was economics (for a job)
-Then it was psychology/philosophy (because I loved philosophy but I had been brainwashed into thinking that the humanities alone aren't worth studying without a science

Now, I am probably 90% sure that I'll be double majoring in Philosophy and either History of Linguistics or maybe even Literature, and then trying to fit in a minor or two in whichever of those I don't pick up as a major or germanics or greek or latin.

I just decided that I don't care about "job prospects". Sure, I could go get a computer science degree or something and go work in a cubicle. I'd make good money and all, but goodness knows I'd be unhappy. Maybe I'll end up going through all the trouble and money to get a PhD in one of those fields and then end up not being able to find a good academic appointment at a university and then end up teaching at highschool or something, but I just know that if I don't even try to persue my dreams then I'll be one of those poor sods who wakes up every day to their boring job and wishes they had took the chance.



PS: If all else fails I could just grab a J.D. or something. I really think that saying that humanities majors have no job prospects is a silly viewpoint.

I hope you haven't been teaching them about how British culture is soooo superior to others and therefore worth embracing / enforcing. I was really disappointed to read your comments in that British Empire chat we had, given your qualifications and position.

No, of course not - indeed I avoided dealing with any of the British philosophers on the course, since I thought they were ghastly (and outside my field). I mean, really, putting Berlin in an introduction to philosophy, and not a single German... Of course I never said that British culture is superior to anything else in the discussion about the empire, only that *some* elements of British culture were superior to *some* elements of other cultures, something that obviously goes the other way too. And someone from one culture could be quite justified in interfering with a practice in another culture, since although other things being equal one should not interfere with other people's cultures, that is not an unbreakable "Prime Directive". Now you may disagree with that but it's not so unreasonable. I wasn't suggesting there was anything special about British culture or that the British have or had any special prerogative to do this. On the contrary, I don't much like British culture and the typical British worldview, at least for the most part, and I think that most of what is good about it can be found in superior form elsewhere. But all this is very OT.

So to those of you who say good luck eating, I'll be fine trust me. You'll be okay too, with you bachelors in business you'll land that assistant management position at Red Lobster and get lots of free meals.

Great post. Its amazing to me that business majors, with all their business knowledge, don't realize that getting your feet onto the corporate ladder is as easy as networking and interview skills.

No, of course not <snip> But all this is very OT.EDIT: I'm very sorry Plot. Those comments were totally uncalled for. I am of course fully aware that you don't hold such blanket type views and I'm sorry I attributed them to you. Quite shameful behaviour on my part.

Anyway, lucky you said that last bit as I'm not up for opening that particular can of worms again. Plus it was totally OT as you point out. My humble apologies once again.

No, of course not - indeed I avoided dealing with any of the British philosophers on the course, since I thought they were ghastly (and outside my field). I mean, really, putting Berlin in an introduction to philosophy, and not a single German... Of course I never said that British culture is superior to anything else in the discussion about the empire, only that *some* elements of British culture were superior to *some* elements of other cultures, something that obviously goes the other way too. And someone from one culture could be quite justified in interfering with a practice in another culture, since although other things being equal one should not interfere with other people's cultures, that is not an unbreakable "Prime Directive". Now you may disagree with that but it's not so unreasonable. I wasn't suggesting there was anything special about British culture or that the British have or had any special prerogative to do this. On the contrary, I don't much like British culture and the typical British worldview, at least for the most part, and I think that most of what is good about it can be found in superior form elsewhere. But all this is very OT.

I have been thinking in reading more British authors,especially in the subject of philosophy and the historical development of that particular field.
Can u elaborate why u think that they are 'Ghastly' and the subject of ur disdain?

The authors in that particular course were Mill (utterly tedious, to my mind) and Berlin (not very interesting either). I'm not interested in ethical or political philosophy, so I didn't have much to say about either of these characters. If forced to teach someone like that, I'd have rather done Bentham, who was both more original and clearer.

The most interesting British philosophers, to my mind, were Hume (who pretty much summed up everything worthwhile in British philosophy before him and who pretty much set the course of everything worthwhile in British philosophy after him, even up to now) and Russell.

The authors in that particular course were Mill (utterly tedious, to my mind) and Berlin (not very interesting either). I'm not interested in ethical or political philosophy, so I didn't have much to say about either of these characters. If forced to teach someone like that, I'd have rather done Bentham, who was both more original and clearer.

The most interesting British philosophers, to my mind, were Hume (who pretty much summed up everything worthwhile in British philosophy before him and who pretty much set the course of everything worthwhile in British philosophy after him, even up to now) and Russell.

That is interesting that u mentioned Hume and Bentham,by convention,alot of authors have mentioned they being Philosopher's Philosopher.

and another thing.a brief saying of those two giants,a question of my own,since i can somewhat speak at length,but dont want to be tedious for this thread so i will trim it down by 2 questions.

1.On the subject of Bentham,since he was facinated on the subject of institutions.Do u think that his belief is highly consist of that laws and institution create society?I really enjoyed his work on the Panopticon.

2.Can Hume greatest contribution,not only the principle of empiricism,but the 'Laws of Causation',will ever be stand at the test of time?

and last but not least,u should try this [note that just because it has the word marxist,please dont think that i am as well:lol: ]http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/khun.htm
under the name,Thomas Kuhn.

u will find the author i was mentioning in the other thread that has some thoughts of ur own on regarding the subject of science and the historical development.

Great post. Its amazing to me that business majors, with all their business knowledge, don't realize that getting your feet onto the corporate ladder is as easy as networking and interview skills.

Lack of savy is why they are business majors and not something else. They'll never understand until they start interviewing and find that this business degree is not a carnival pass to corporate high rise positions. Like I said though, Red Lobster loves these maliable easily conforming propoganda soaking sponges.

i was a history major as an undergrad and i loved it. i went in as a history major and did not look back.

some good job op's for history majors (in the US that is):
teacher
archivist
librarian
writer
lawyer
park ranger

i went in knowing that i was going to teach so there was not any uncertainty for me. many of my colleagues, though, have had a hard time figuring out what they want to do for a living.

On that list put:

Self Employed business owner
Accountant for State fund (my friend, he gets a company car and salary with benefits)
Management positions

i was a history major as an undergrad and i loved it. i went in as a history major and did not look back.

some good job op's for history majors (in the US that is):
teacher
archivist
librarian
writer
lawyer
park ranger

i went in knowing that i was going to teach so there was not any uncertainty for me. many of my colleagues, though, have had a hard time figuring out what they want to do for a living.

History is interesting, and working with numbers (accounting and such) is boring for me. But like already mentioned, what jobs can a history major get?
None of the ones listed by El Justo appeal to me, but being an executive (or another top position where I make decisions) does. And the ones on lifeaquatic's list I think is unrealistic, except for self employed, but in that case you don't need a degree at all - you are your own boss!

I know you probably won't get a top corporate position with an undergraduate degree in business, but atleast you'll start higher up on the latter than a guy with a degree that doesn't relate to the business at all, i.e. a history major. Am I wrong? (I hope I am. I have to make my decision really soon, on what major to choose)

Homie,

i would venture to say that an undergard history degree could possibly lead to other avenues such as the ones that i had listed previously. however, i would not limit it to what i wrote. these were all occupations that immediately came to mind.

now, you say you want something w/ "executive" type responsibilities. well, a school administrator could be another avenue. by this i mean that once in the teaching profession, one can take grad school classes and become certified as an admin or principal. of course, this is just an example...

Yes, it is just that I abhor the thought of getting a job relating to school, and definately not a teacher, no offence to the teachers out there.

I fear getting a business degree and waking up to a job I hate every morning. But I also fear getting a history degree and not getting a job at all, or biting the sour apple and become a teacher (which I promised myself I would never do). Ahhh, the dilemma.

I fear getting a business degree and waking up to a job I hate every morning. But I also fear getting a history degree and not getting a job at all, or biting the sour apple and become a teacher (which I promised myself I would never do). Ahhh, the dilemma.

get a history degree and if you can't find a job go into law. Or grab a couple "job" minors along with the history major. Additionally, you could easily get into an mba program w/ a history major.

I could do all those things, but if I get a masters and all I will be pretty poor and old by the time I finish :eek: . I am starting studies this January, and this april I will be 22 years old. I also hate being in debt to someone (almost as much as I hate someone being in debt to me) so I vowed that I would never take up a loan. I got a scholarship that covers tuition and room costs, and I have savings to cover the rest, so I'm good for 4 years, but by then I am broke.

I could do all those things, but if I get a masters and all I will be pretty poor and old by the time I finish :eek: . I am starting studies this January, and this april I will be 22 years old. I also hate being in debt to someone (almost as much as I hate someone being in debt to me) so I vowed that I would never take up a loan. I got a scholarship that covers tuition and room costs, and I have savings to cover the rest, so I'm good for 4 years, but by then I am broke.

Work evenings at a nice restaurant while you go to school. You could EASILY pull in $40+/hr, and people who have a part-time job while they are a student actually tend to get better grades because it forces planning/scheduling.

Plotinus, the philosophy behind University education in the U.S. is quite different from Britain. The emphasis there is on a liberal education, with specialization not really occurring until graduate school. That's probably why the American Ph.D.'s take so much longer than the British ones--they take a lot of coursework that the brits would have taken as undergraduates.