how the hell is philosophy a thing, like, get a fucking job

>>1332859

ok sorry for upsetting you dude

>>1332859
I didn't know I had to choose between one or the other.

>>1332859
philosophy majors usually end up as lawyers, policy analysts, editors, writers, professors, psychologists, whatever. being able to read difficult texts thoroughly, extract important information, and think logically and comprehensively are incredibly important skills.

source: math major lmfao

File: 1461823608700.jpg (37KB, 457x457px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 457x457px

>>1332889
>being able to read difficult texts thoroughly
>mfw currently doing management and they're making us read Foucalt.

I know that management and philosophy are different schools but how does management stack up against philosophy?

My understanding is that Management finds most efficient way to make people work, while Philosophy is just 'why the hell are we even here?' and 'A vs B'.

File: 1461763287208.jpg (656KB, 1024x1351px) Image search: [Google]

656KB, 1024x1351px

>>1332934
No. That kind of existential debate stuff is part of philosophy, I'll grant, but there's ethics, epistemology, logic, rhetoric, tons of useful things. Think of philosophy as an overarching supercategory for "Modes of thought" and it'll seem way less useless, except perhaps on a semantic level.

I'll give you an example,

Finding the most efficient way to make people work are ethical and epistemological issues, partly. You have to make your employees happy enough to stay motivated. You have to neither underpay them so much that they leave, nor overpay them so much that they become financially free. You have to decide what qualifies people for what jobs. You have to promote people who are competent, but not so far up that they're out of their depth, or can make powerful decisions they shouldn't be trusted with. These are all fundamentally philosophical issues, in need of a keen and adaptive human mind, for now at least (whether or not we should automate people is also a philosophical issue). These are issues that, while there's scientific data about them, that data isn't complete, nor can be applied usefully to every field of business. (Plus Science is an epistemological philosophy anyway. Math is the crux of logic.)

Philosophy is inevitable in every area of life. Philosophical decisions arise in the middle of common events in medicine and surgery. They arise in managment and finance. They arise in science (is the knowledge we're gathering worth breeches of ethics. Animal testing? Human Testing? Once we have the knowledge how should it be applied?) I could go on and on about how too many people trusted with important decisions are unacquainted with history and philosophy, despite being otherwise well trained in their field.

I'm not saying you should read the pretentious ramblings of every philosopher ever, just acquaint yourself with the fields of philosophy and realize when you're making a philosophical decision while performing your Earthly duties.

>>1333058
Makes sense and thanks for the lengthy description. I have been reading a few and thinking about how to apply them.