How are third and pass degrees regarded these days?

studentphil

melancholly wrote:

now that's clearly just rubbish!
for some scientists it is unimportant (you yourself use the word sometimes!) but others take it incredibly seriously - ask anyone who works in animal testing or work with sensitive populations.
just because you are doing an undergraduate philosophy degree doesn't mean you can generalise about every scientist in the country..... that's extrapolation - maybe you should go back and study the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning!!!

if you are assuming i can't know anything about spirituality without studying it then the same holds for you and science.... by your own aruguement you are not qualified to make the statement! part of scientific ethics involves presentation of results versus interpretation. i'm not even sure what facts you are using for your sweeping comments - drfluffy just hit the nail on the head - you sound entirely arrogant....i'm hoping it's just the way you are phrasing things because it's coming across as a major superiority complex.

I am not saying you have to know in detail the conceptual elements of sprituality to know anything of it. I am only talking some and NOT ALL people in Science.

kittiwoz

I have to say I find medical students to be generally incredibly hardworking and dedicated. I do agree they tend to group together a bit but I think that is more because they are so busy and have different hours than other students than because of arrogance or cliquiness.

The medics I know take their studies and their profession extremely seriously and are highly aware of issues regarding medical ethics. It may be, and probably is, that the way in which this is taught is very different to how it would be taught on a philosophy course but surely this is a necessary thing? I admit right now that my knowledge of medicine and medical ethics and also of philisophy and theology is so limited as to be practicall non-existant so I shan't be offended if people think I'm talking rubbish but what I'm thinking is this. Philosophists and theologians deal, as Phil himself says, with conceptual problems. Medics on the other hand need to operate within a consistent set of moral rules, which may be pragmatic. This is not to say there is not an overlap but ethics, for the two groups, serve different purposes so it makes sense they should be taught differently. I hope I am making myself understood here. I don't intend to imply that conceptual ethics cannot be applied to real world problems or that medics are not capable of grasping conceptual issues. I also think it is important to appreciate that medics are under extreme time pressure. They have so much they have to learn that it is no surprise if they have limited time to dedicate to something like the spiritual aspect of life and death which may be seen as desirable but not as esential as the vast amounts of clinical knowledge they seem to have to accrue.

talksalot81

A number of points:

Keeping your 'class' together is not a bad idea at all. Our physics classes used to have lectures all in the physics building. Since scheduling became central, the classes are now all over the university and our classes are not as close as they once were. This makes collaboration and discussion more difficult and frankly, during their working day, the students are there to learn physics, there is no need for them to be going beyond this. That is for their own time!

Originally Posted by studentphil
That is a great problem with all science education is that has an in built assumption of certainty and truth which should not always be granted.

I dont know where this came from but it strikes me as a view that doesnt see the big picture. You may well have a point when it comes to school science, but at higher levels you go beyond this. You gain an appreciation for where and when something is absolute. You are taught why this is the case, how to apply it and how to work within the limitations imposed. Non-scientists should NOT comment because they are infinitely worse in this respect. It should also be noted that being unable to appreciate the level of uncertainty is as much a failing as over estimating. There is a level at which you just accept and move on else the world would not go round. Engineers do not philophosize about every last thing. They know the limits, they apply within that and come up with something that works. Who cares that they dont actually know the absolute 'truth'!? If that was the case, we'd never have advanced beyond the stone age.

studentphil

Engineers do not philophosize- philosophy of technology is a growing area so even Engineers do philophosize these days.

cupid_s

studentphil wrote:

At my uni medical students are sort of a self contained lot in that they have their own building and thus indirectly are made to be isolated from the common student(like me). It is sad that even when they are taught medical ethics by Philosophy staff that they do not even come to the philosophy school for that and they live locked away in this medical school building.

I must be getting confused cos I was sure you went to Leeds Uni?
If you are then you don't know what you're talknig about - they do not have their own building! I assume you mean the worsley building? Which is where I work and studied (and i did not do medicine), where the dental school is, where physiology, pharmacology, cardiovascular research, neuroscience and anatomy are all located.

Reading through this thread I'm glad I'm not a medical doctor as I would be very offended - but your view of scientists in general is bad enough. You seem to think the only degree worth doing is philosophy and I bet you do not even really know many scientists. Good job really as they probably wouldn't be happy with your low opinion of them.

studentphil

cupid_stunt wrote:

I must be getting confused cos I was sure you went to Leeds Uni?
If you are then you don't know what you're talknig about - they do not have their own building! I assume you mean the worsley building? Which is where I work and studied (and i did not do medicine), where the dental school is, where physiology, pharmacology, cardiovascular research, neuroscience and anatomy are all located.

Reading through this thread I'm glad I'm not a medical doctor as I would be very offended - but your view of scientists in general is bad enough. You seem to think the only degree worth doing is philosophy and I bet you do not even really know many scientists. Good job really as they probably wouldn't be happy with your low opinion of them.

I am not anti doctor or scientist- I do not know what makes you think that.
They have their own building in the scene that it is all Biomedical sciences in that one building.
I do not see how thinking if medical education was a bit wider it might be better is really going to cause great offence to med students.

cupid_s

studentphil wrote:

I am not anti doctor or scientist- I do not know what makes you think that.
They have their own building in the scene that it is all Biomedical sciences in that one building.
I do not see how thinking if medical education was a bit wider it might be better is really going to cause great offence to med students.

But doesn't the school of philosophy have it's own building them? I know engineering does - but i suppose the are indireclt being isolated from everyone else on campus? From the 'common' students? What is common about you that isn't about every other student in biomedical sciences?

But your post their implies that you don't think a medical education is good enough at the moment and needs to be made better. They study very hard (much harder, I imagine, than you and most other students do), and for a lot longer than most other courses require. Make it any wider and the course would have to be 7 years long!

The offending bit it saying that scientists hold no interest in the philosophical issues of science, that a certain medical student is narrow-minded but it's not really their fault cos all doctors are like this cos they are trained to be that way! How can that not be offensive and very patronising?

studentphil

cupid_stunt wrote:

But doesn't the school of philosophy have it's own building them? I know engineering does - but i suppose the are indireclt being isolated from everyone else on campus? From the 'common' students? What is common about you that isn't about every other student in biomedical sciences?

But your post their implies that you don't think a medical education is good enough at the moment and needs to be made better. They study very hard (much harder, I imagine, than you and most other students do), and for a lot longer than most other courses require. Make it any wider and the course would have to be 7 years long!

The offending bit it saying that scientists hold no interest in the philosophical issues of science, that a certain medical student is narrow-minded but it's not really their fault cos all doctors are like this cos they are trained to be that way! How can that not be offensive and very patronising?

I saw after saying that to Dr F that she had really misunderstand what I meant rather than taking a narrow view as I first though. I am sorry to her for that over sight. Some Science students have no interest in the philosophy of science.

I hope that is clear what I meant now and that we can all be friends again!!!:beer:

talksalot81

studentphil wrote:

Engineers do not philophosize- philosophy of technology is a growing area so even Engineers do philophosize these days.

Yes but that is not the sort of philosophy you were takling about! You were talking about absolute facts and their use. Philosophy of technology has basically nothing to do with the use of these facts.

talksalot81

studentphil wrote:

I saw after saying that to Dr F that she had really misunderstand what I meant rather than taking a narrow view as I first though. I am sorry to her for that over sight. Some Science students have no interest in the philosophy of science.

I hope that is clear what I meant now and that we can all be friends again!!!:beer:

Some philosophy students have no interest in the application to reality... heck many student have absolutely no interest in their subject in general... so I dont think your comment has any real significance.