this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
149 points (96.9% liked)

Ask Lemmy

34803 readers
1208 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I have two degrees in philosophy. I quit my PhD with an MA after I realized academic life wasn't for me.

When people find this out about me... they rarely react positivity anymore. Most are confused, some look upset, others get defensive or crack cliche jokes about how I got a job with a useless degree like that or if I work at McDonalds.

It seems to have gotten way worse the past few years. In my late 20s/early 30s people seemed to react a lot more positively to this fact about my life? People would ask me about it and why I did it and what I studied specifically. I really liked those conversations.

I feel naive as to why philosophy is so controversial for the average person, anymore than English or History is? I really enjoyed my studies and still do them as a hobby now.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 17 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I think Western capitalist culture has slowly eroded the value of thinking in favor of doing and, through gradual financial coercion via the International Monetary Fund, this has slowly become the global dominant worldview.

In other words, you were born a few centuries too late for philosophy to be valued. Even in the past it was often met with scrutiny (though often commanded respect).

Nowadays thinkers are expected to ascend corporate ladders and embed themselves within instituions with the ultimate goal of extracting excess capital beyond ones needs from said institutions. That is what the current global value system supports.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I have college age kids and there’s been a lot of talk among their peers about whether college is still worth it, but expected financial return is their only criteria

They’ve definitely bought into the stereotype that most people don’t need a college education and maybe that’s true from a simple comparison of job tasks. However I try to point out that it’s been a lot of years since a high school education became expected and society has gotten much more complicated. Wider knowledge base and ability to think critically are vital in modern society. It’s about time we raised the base education from 12 years to 14

[–] shaggyb@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

BUT HOW DO JOB WIF HUMAMBNETEES DUGREE?

That's basically why.

I think it's cool as hell. We all need to read philosophy. I really wish I'd had the bandwidth to do something similar along with my own chosen path. Mad respect.

[–] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

Philosophy gets a bad rap, even by fellow academics sometimes. Commonly cited criticisms are that it has become too prosaic and detached from society at large. Maybe that's true of some philosophers but I don't see a problem with people studying something purely for the joy of learning and there are philosophers who do an excellent job of explaining philosophical ideas to lay audiences, Alain de Botton immediately springs to mind. Status Anxiety is among my favourite videos.

The reality is that we have too few people who think about what it means to live a good life and make a wholesome society

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 days ago

anymore than English or History is

It'll be the same for them too.
Nobody appreciates learning for the sake of learning anymore, learning is strictly for getting jobs. Although if you have the money to spend on getting many degrees worrying about paying off loans, then there may be another aspect to the resentment, considering the cost of university these days

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I personally think anybody here saying your negative response is because people hate thinkers or anti intellectualism or whatever is totally missing the point. Those things are certainly true. But probably not why you get weird looks.

Probably it's a combination of 2 things:

  1. In 2025 philosophy, English, history, poetry, etc are to greater or lesser extents "hobby degrees". People enjoy the topics generally but don't see a way to repay loans using that degree, because if you're not going to go teach it or write the next book, there's no money in it. These are things we do with our free time for the love of it.

  2. By extension of 1, if you CAN have one of these degrees you either a) have a boatload of money, b) you must be naive of the fact (according to people you are talking to) that your job prospects are very limited, or c) you have extreme aptitude to be part of the small group that can make it, but everybody will still limp you into b.

I have a friend who majored in music in college, but not to teach: it was specifically to play timpani. He also was perplexed at the negative reactions he would get. Unfortunately right before he graduated someone told him that there are only like 10 professional concert timpanist positions in the country that provide a salary you can live from, and the rest just moonlight and have other jobs. After 1 year if hunting a good position he sold his drums and got a job in marketing selling windows and siding.

Of course the world would be less vibrant without professionals in these areas, but there are a lot more philosophy majors working in, say, marketing than there are Humes, Kants, Socrateses, Hegels, and so on.

Basically it doesn't look practical so it seems like either a bad financial choice or that you're a spoiled rich kid unless you mention "double major" type stuff.

[–] daggermoon@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

I think a philosophy degree is cool as hell. Fuck anyone who thinks otherwise.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 6 days ago

Quality of life wise philosophy is the best. Its the basis of most everything. I would be scared as heck to be looking for work with just that though. When I had an opportunity to get a masters I picked up education partially because I was interested in it but also because its largely a mix of philosophy, psychology, and statistics. Likely as close as I could get to philosophy while still being sellable on my resume.

[–] kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Just imagining the wasted time and brain power makes me uncomfortable

[–] TimewornTraveler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I have a degree in philosophy and a degree in therapy and i promise the therapy part makes people way more uncomfortable than the philosophy part. I never really encountered weird attitudes about philosophy tbh. maybe it's how I own it. I very earnestly live like a Socrates - Diogenes hybrid and try to make smart stuff sound dumb and safe to engage the community neurons. and my general excitement about it, if my philosophy background comes up, it's from a place of passionate curiosity where we're already talking about interesting shit and me using the ph word just makes them think "oh we're about to get into it".

it could also be the context with which ppl get to know me is more receptive to philosophical conversations. I genuinely believe that therapy is literally just a modern philosophy practice.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 3 points 6 days ago

I've spent hundreds of hours outside a university course studying epistemology. It's one of the most valuable skills I've ever learned.

I spread epistemology like a virus. Thank you philosophy, for the vessel you lend your brother.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago

There's a philosopher/history of philos on the bowling team I've just joined. I'm philospically inclined so I asked him if Descartes was ripping off Socrates' "I only know that I know nothing" which could be interpreted as "I doubt everything except my existence". It's a topic that came up the other day on Lemmy. He said no, Socrates was just saying he was wiser than everyone else because he wasn't deluded about his abilities.

I asked him about Descartes' relationship to solipsism reply: Descartes wasn't a solipsist because his god wouldn't deceive him like that, Descartes' god is real because of the ontological argument. Which one's that again?...

I kinda just felt like I was making him do his job...

[–] MissJinx@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

it makes me sleepy

[–] Sly2@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

If you never had a crisis when studying philosophy during which you were wondering wether it is worth studying at all, did you even really study it in depth?

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

So, where do you work?

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Because religious people are raised with a flawed worldview that they can't waver from or they're going to hell and also made to feel extremely shameful about regular human emotions like curiosity and horniness

[–] Geodad@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

I find philosophy fascinating. I'm especially fascinated by logic and logical fallacies.

When you repeatedly call out a theist for faulty logic, its so satisfying.

[–] rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

Those crappy old chairs in the classrooms have no lumbar support.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

In this dissonant world people are afraid of logic as they may be vexed by what is discovered.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I have nothing about people choosing to study whatever they want.

I get a little bothered when people suggest philosophy majors as the "moral compass of society". For instance, I've been hearing more and more on how "philosophy is central to society because we need philosophy majors in ethical committees everywhere". And while I agree that ethical committees are important, I disagree that studying philosophy makes you more fit for a ethical committee than any other person. As moral of a society derives from the whole society, those ethical committees should follow more a popular jury structure imho.

My point is that when people follow this position they are, inherently saying "a philosophy major is more moral than you" which is the thing that ultimately bothers me.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 0 points 6 days ago (3 children)

i interpret that to mean ethics committees that provide oversight to other aspects of an organization should study ethics. i'd argue that's a good place to start, but a better direction to go is to include conversations about ethics and their analysis in all curricula. there's a huge difference between morality and ethics. morarlity is a moment to moment decision making process. ethics describes a critical systems analysis field directed at defining and building a more ideal society

[–] floop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

are you still alive, Nazi?

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

But ethics and morality emerges from society. Giving a small group the power to decide and indoctrinate over that is dangerous and ultimately "unethical".

I get the feeling of trying to push it. Nowadays most people studying philosophy is left wing. So pushing that those people should control society ethics is basically pushing our political agenda.

I'm leftist, but not the kind of leftist that would do "everything" for the cause. Because I see the dangers of it. What if we do that, we leave ethics of society into a small group and that small group now or in the future diverges from what the society or myself consider moral?

That's why I'm also against that idea of trying to push a "ethics" course on every major. Now it's seen as a way to push a particular agenda that we agree on. But surely in the future it will be used to push an agenda we don't like (as it had happened in the past), that's a big risk.

I prefer to leave ethics to the individual and society as a sum. An not giving a small group power over it.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net -1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

yeah which is why i advocate everyone should study it at least a little. just leaving it to go without discussion or serious analysis just leads to anti-intellectualism and eventually fascism, but centralizing it just gives fascists a focus point to concentrate on getting into power. it's a tough balance to strike. but the basics to me is, as someone who studied ethics, we need to be having conversations about ethics all the time because if we don't, then moral relativists will justify genocide, rape, and whatever horrible shit they as individuals find acceptable.

we both agree that more left and more everyone is better, but i think we need to get everyone actively involved rather that passively involved

[–] floop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

are you still alive, Nazi?

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

But that's not advocating for everyone studying. It's advocating for everyone being taught it. By a teacher. That implies that there would be a specific curriculum. And that curriculum will follow a specific dogma.

With other subjects you can have neutral teachings. Math is math. Others may be more complicated, like history, but there's some degree of neutrality to be found

With ethics I think is inherently impossible to teach it on a neutral way. You would need to teach some particular set of ethics. And there's not a scientific way to describe a set of ethic norms as the right one. Quoting Professor Farnsworth "Science have not prove that human life is important". A set of ethics would be chosen as the correct one, and it will be taught by a teacher that will most likely come from a particular political scene. And even while agreeing with that political school of thought, I see great dangers in trying to officially push it as the correct one.

I remember in my school years. I had both religion subject (because it was a religious school) and moral subject (a subject mandated in school curriculum by the government). And it was just wrong, trying to push things like that into children (or adults) even if it was good (moral subject curriculum was written by a left wing government).

I think the members of society should conclude to the best ethical norms, not by indoctrination, but by experience. It should be the set of norms that they would see better for their experience in the society. Thus the way to "teach" people about the ethics we see as good is building a good society with those ethics. Basically teach by experience.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net -1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

you don't have to teach a particular set of ethics. you teach a framework of analysis and then analyze some systems. you're still mixing morality with ethics, which is fair, they're related. basically i'm advocating to teach kids to question every authority with a critical lens. but this hasn't anything to do with religion, norms, or adopting a pre-existing system, but about teaching how to analyze systems

[–] floop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

are you still alive, Nazi?

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That is fair. And a sensible part of a school age curriculum (already included in my country, that's included in philosophy mandatory courses). But I don't see it having a extension to be included "everywhere", once taught in school is taught. I won't see a point continuing that formation in universities, same as I won't see why someone studying history should have an algebra course in university.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

where i am, the united states, serious analysis of philosophy and ethics doesn't enter your curriculum until you are in college and studying either at a liberal arts school where even the engineers have to study the humanities, or you are majoring in one of the liberal arts. so i'm a little jealous of your outlook right now 😂

that's where our status comes from teaching history majors math: it's their first time learning it many times even though many places algebra was covered in middle school. our primary educations don't start until adulthood here and we're constantly behind, and those critical thinking courses are elective with it being totally fine to drop out of highschool up to 6 years before you ever would have been expected to be exposed to it.

and as long as that's possible in one county, it's possible in any country. our oppressors want us stupid, so talk to a kid today about identifying how someone else is justifying what right and wrong is today!

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 6 days ago

What do you work as?

[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Frankly because everybody knows somebody in that line of academic study, or knows somebody that knows somebody. And it's generally regarded as a waste of time with no practical outcome. My BIL studied philosophy for 10 years and ended up starting his own treadmill repair company, leveraging his previous skills as a mechanic. You just wasted 10 years of your life and $300,000 of money/opportunity-cost, basically, when most people can't pay their rent, afford food, or have basic comforts.

[–] Adverse_Reaction@anarchist.nexus 57 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Here is a quote, taken slightly out of context, that I believe speaks to what you are experiencing:

"The clinical picture of a person who has been reduced to elemental concerns of survival is still frequently mistaken for a portrait of the survivor's underlying character." - World Health Organization. (May 31, 2016). ICD-11 Beta Draft (Joint Linearization for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics).

Extrapolating from that in this other context, we can assume more and more people are simply losing their capacity to entertain "loftier" ideals than immediate survival. For all too many, there was never any other choice.

I studied philosophy at university in the 80's, and remember the endless jokes about what restaurant job I would be able to get with my degree, etc. It speaks to the hidden framework of capitalism that confines us all. It's only gotten worse in my lifetime.

I look back at my parents, who were able to buy their own house and raise two kids with a single earner, blue collar wage. My mom did eventually work as well, which allowed us children to go to college.

Now I am close to retirement, and I have nothing to show for it. No house, no car, no big retirement payout waiting. I 'squandered' my money and time being an activist and humanitarian, living in the moment and refusing to produce or hoard wealth for the capitalist machine just because.

I try to use my philosophical insight as a practical methodology to remove myself from the clamor for crumbs. I am a minimalist, an environmentalist, a gardener, a handyman and helper, a teacher - a papa smurf to my community and philosopher to my peers. I wouldn't trade it for all the money in the world, but I would be remiss to ignore the looming economic circumstances that threaten the future of humanity, myself included.

But I will forge ahead into this wilderness. As Deleuze and Guattari would say, forget reading someone else's map, become your own cartographer. Philosophy is a great basis for profound understanding of the human condition. It won't make you rich, and it certainly won't be respected or understood in this modern world - but it will enrich you. If you follow your heart it can show you a path through the madness that does not require that you shed your humanity or reduce yourself to that of an economic survivor, victor, or victim, and can serve as a beacon for others less fortunate to have been afforded such a perspective.

I often share the story of Taigu Ryōkan, the Zen Master, who perfectly illustrates both the value of philosophical introspection, and it's liberating effect from the confines of the material world.

https://laspina.org/the-thief-and-the-moon-a-zen-tale-in-ryokans-haiku/

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TerranFenrir@lemmy.ca 43 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] WhatGodIsMadeOf@feddit.org 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I just want to consume media and buy things that don't have any extension to the raw experience of what it actually is to be human. I want to be a product, not a real human. And I'll pay taxes for people to kill other people to ensure I have the freedom to do so. /S

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 41 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Just speculating here, but I think the economic situation becoming much more difficult for many people might be a factor. When it's hard finding a decent job even after studying something "good", spending years of your life and possibly lots of money on a degree with no immediate economic benefits might seem like quite a ridiculous luxury.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 36 points 1 week ago (3 children)

For a layperson, philosophy doesn’t have an obvious practical application. They think philosophers just sit around pondering esoteric topics and can’t imagine why anyone would pay them for it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago (4 children)

"The arts are useless and will make you a poor stupid leftist... Do a trade" <----- type of statemet that has been doing the rounds on the far-right since at least 2014.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't think it makes them uncomfortable, I think they just don't get it.

Most of us are told to go to school to get the job you want, and philosopher really hasn't been a high demand job since ancient Greece.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

Hey, almost-same boat here! I’m guessing in your late 20s/early 30s, you were likely surrounded by people who were in the same environment (higher ed), or who were sussing out your potential. But when you’re out of the ivory tower, it doesn’t mean shit.

Humanities degrees are critical thinking in a way that people generally don’t want to engage in. There’s no neat solution, and it will eventually make you confront your own ideology, or the one you’ve been in the grip of, and people really don’t want to think about that. Even more simply, higher ed is a stand in for “liberalism,” and in the last couple years, a thing to outright and wholly reject.

I don’t tell people that my English Ph.D. primary list straight up said “communist theory” at the top. I’m happy to let everyone think I just proofread stuff after 16 years of school, and I’ll say I should’ve been an electrician every time. I think a rich inner life and infinitely more nuanced understanding of the world is better than whatever my neighbor’s got going on.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

Philosophers are always the first targets of anti-intellectuals. People genuinely believe that studding what's true about the world is a waste of time.

You can tell that this is a prejudice because the same people who think you shouldn't get paid for having useless knowledge will still hire economists.

load more comments
view more: next ›