Nice People 13: Nice Save

Yorkie1

LydiaJ wrote: »

He prefers subjects where there's a right answer.

I had to study a branch of philosophy at uni as one of my subjects. I, too, like subjects with a right answer and therefore struggled with the lack of certainty that I perceived in my branch of philosophy.

Might be worth checking this out before he makes his final choices.

Nikkster

LydiaJ wrote: »

JHe prefers subjects where there's a right answer.

I dunno. Is there ever a truly right answer to most things? There's just a right answer to the best of our knowledge/ the most popular theory right now.

Maybe I'm better suited to philosophy than science :rotfl:

lostinrates

Nikkster wrote: »

I dunno. Is there ever a truly right answer to most things? There's just a right answer to the best of our knowledge/ the most popular theory right now.

Maybe I'm better suited to philosophy than science :rotfl:

I'm with you nikkster. Believe there is a right and wrong answer is in my -not necessarily right but currently held - opinion dangerous territory. We have to take decisions based on thought and acceptance we are fallible. We need more scientists who remember exactly what you are saying IMO.


Incidentally there was a thread in the arms recently where someone said they were agnostic or atheist ( cannot remember which they said) because they were a scientist. I thought of the great scientists who have religion in their lives, and those who IMO treat science as a religion, and smiled to myself.

I love philosophy as a reading matter and conversation and sometimes think I wish I would have loved to read philosophy at uni. Then I kick myself and realise I would likely have gone potty.

zagubov

Yorkie1 wrote: »

I had to study a branch of philosophy at uni as one of my subjects. I, too, like subjects with a right answer and therefore struggled with the lack of certainty that I perceived in my branch of philosophy.

Might be worth checking this out before he makes his final choices.

After sampling philosophy in my first degree, I did a higher degree in it
It was quite fascinating but raised more questions than it answered.
I'm a strong believer that it should be a part of every degree. In fact the IB has a Theory of Knowledge module which is epistemology.

In my last job ( a faith college) they taught a philosophy qualification in the RE lessons.

I think the old General Studies qualification people mentioned earlier also covered a bit of epistemology, and the tripartite theory of knowledge (justified true belief). It used to be that having the General Studies A level as a fourth subject was one of the best predictors of success at uni, which was very much underappreciated by the students parents who often thought it was filler.

chewmylegoff

michaels wrote: »

Weren't whales involved at some point?

Yes, but they faded in the second half.

Doozergirl

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Yes, but they faded in the second half.

I was worried about you!

How is Mrs Chewy?

chewmylegoff

Doozergirl wrote: »

I was worried about you!

How is Mrs Chewy?

Massive! 33wks now so probably about 4ish to go. she finshed work yesterday, I am much happier now she isn't stubbornly struggling in on a 1 hour+ train journey every day.

We had a scare last week when the sonographer detected excessive fluid around one of the babies- a lot of panic down the phone (I was skiing ) but then saw consultant on Monday who told us sonographer was clueless and everything was fine.

Generali

lostinrates wrote: »

Which sort of butcher?

I loved next to a horse specialist butcher in Milan. .

And boulangere v patissiere compared to British 'baker'? Hmmm. Its tough GDb, tough old world where these lines are drawn

I've lived in a village and a town which had a specialist pork butcher in the UK (both have subsequently closed). Every French village of any size will have a charcutier as well as a butcher.

LydiaJ

Nikkster wrote: »

I dunno. Is there ever a truly right answer to most things? There's just a right answer to the best of our knowledge/ the most popular theory right now.

Maybe I'm better suited to philosophy than science :rotfl:

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm with you nikkster. Believe there is a right and wrong answer is in my -not necessarily right but currently held - opinion dangerous territory. We have to take decisions based on thought and acceptance we are fallible. We need more scientists who remember exactly what you are saying IMO.

Incidentally there was a thread in the arms recently where someone said they were agnostic or atheist ( cannot remember which they said) because they were a scientist. I thought of the great scientists who have religion in their lives, and those who IMO treat science as a religion, and smiled to myself.

I love philosophy as a reading matter and conversation and sometimes think I wish I would have loved to read philosophy at uni. Then I kick myself and realise I would likely have gone potty.

I take the points that both of you are making. As you know, I myself am not in the "scientist so therefore must be atheist" camp.

Nevertheless, I still find that I prefer to have the open-ended, person-centred, potentially messy stuff in my private life, where I can think about it, discuss it, but not have to write essays on it. For formal education (either to study or to teach) I prefer the kind of subjects where the mark schemes are reasonably objective, and it's easy to tell how well somebody has done - none of this "well, examiner A thinks this is a D grade essay but it was remarked by examiner B who thinks that on the contrary it's worthy of an A*" kind of uncertainty.

michaels

PasturesNew wrote: »

This is the thing, Stephen Hawking could well have been told, in an alternate universe, "big bang? Don't be so soft boy. You're not suited to this subject are you. We'll not renew your contract, maybe you should check out a career in retail"

I like if something's either right or wrong.

Oh, in my imagination you are more a 'shades of grey' gal