|
On May 09 2008 01:24 Chill wrote:
I don't understand the arrogance of people. You hear it day-in, day-out. "I'm not going to work 9-5, I'm going to be something important. I'm going to be rich. I'm not working for anyone other than me."
I mean, you basically wrote "Hey, I'm going to be rich." O..k... Would you care to give us a little more insight into the matter? What steps have you taken towards this job, why are you qualified for it, what kind of work are you going to put in? ANYTHING? It's like you just decided you're going to be rich.
This bugs me because everyone downtalks 9-5 and 99% of people end up doing it. Chances are, you're not special. So find something you enjoy doing. If getting rich was easy, everyone would be rich. Entrprenuring is hard. Starting your first business is hard. Getting rich working for someone else is hard.
So tell me azndsh, why are you special and why are you going to be rich?
<hr>
Personally, I tried fairly hard to get into the games industry. It came a time where I had to decide between waiting for my dream or playing it safe, and I chose safe. This industry is booming like crazy, so although it's not rainbows and lollipops every day, the pay is incredible for the work and I do enjoy it. My plan has always been to build finances until ~40 and then goto school and become a high school teacher, and nothing has really changed that yet.
First of all, working on wall street will probably be closer to 8am to 8pm or something ridiculous like that.
I guess it came off as somewhat arrogant, but I'm just looking for some direction. My point is that the most motivated/successful friends I know are those that have some goal that they strive for and work towards. One guy has been doing computer stuff for about a decade, another one has been aiming for a wall street job since he set foot on campus two years ago, and my roommate is hardcore math, etc.
They're the guys that have $35+/hour internships with big name companies lined up this summer. They have had a goal, and working towards it invariably gets them somewhere.
I mean, I don't feel like I'm significantly dumber than some of these friends, but there's a huge difference in motivation. I've been jumping around between computer science and academic economics and finance without really being set on anything. So basically, now I've decided to go the finance/wall street route.
|
Calgary26004 Posts
Yea I way overstated what I meant. You clearly had put more thought into it than you let on, I just assumed you were like "Cool, I should just be rich. That would be awesome."
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On May 09 2008 01:10 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2008 23:53 ahrara_ wrote:
I have a question -- why study political theory? I'm taking an intro class this semester, and while it's been interesting, I can't see the practical value anywhere. Considering I'm around people who talk politics everyday, I'm involved in forensics, and I'm a volunteer with two political campaigns, I think that means something. Don't get me wrong, I loved international relations and comparative government, but this class just is oaifdjdsaf. I know people can't be taking Plato's ideas seriously today, so except for academic reasons, what's the point?
fuck i have this essay on Hobbes due in 4 hours dammit
Ok, maybe that's not the right question. I mean I can see the value of a lot of the theory, and I understand what a big influence it is. I just don't see the point of reading the original text and analyzing it. That's what I'm saying, except you're talking about political philosophy. Political theory is different. It's stuff like social movement theories, etc. Really quite close to sociology. As for Hobbes, you should analyze it in context with his historical setting since obviously the English Civil War had a large effect on him. You can parallel it to modern settings and they way journalists/philosophers write about society today.
my interest extends quite far from political philosophy proper, i only say political philosophy because most of my other interests are extensions of problems in political and moral philosophy. for example, my interest in metaphilosophy is in part due to the importance of a good account of multiculturalism/relativism, and my interest in social theory and the social sciences is motivated by the recognition that merely having a good ideal or the so called political will is not enough to achieve social objectives. so an assessment of social structures and mechanisms is important.
but, since political philosophy is most sincerely engaged with the normative foundation of everything political, i feel it is the proper starting point of reflection. this is to say, it provides an orientation that gives direction to the practical pursuits.
in terms of choosing a field, the most important thing for me is the potential for doing something substantial. the position of political philosophy is quite interesting. it may potentially have a lot of impact, being the foundation deep theory of a variety of social normative disciplines, at least in the english speaking circles. things like law and a variety of public policy stuff. on the other hand, by merely doing political philosophy as it is now, mainly concerned about normative political ideologies, i do think it is severely limited, or, the work is already done, and all that remains is to transcribe the influence into more practical fields.
|
United States22883 Posts
the position of political philosophy is quite interesting. it may potentially have a lot of impact, being the foundation deep theory of a variety of social normative disciplines, at least in the english speaking circles. things like law and a variety of public policy stuff.
Explain what you're talking about.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
well, for instance, we can see traditions in legal theory and economics that are influenced by or corresponds to classical liberalism. counter to that, legal realism is influenced by pragmaticism and critical legal studies influenced by critical theory. econ public policy stuff operates with things like the public/private distinction and various institutions like property or the corporation as they are politically conceived. problems like institutions regulating global finances or the doctrine of maximizing shareholder value all are influenced by or depend on political philosophy stuff.
and i was not being clear with what i meant by political philosophy. many of the problems in non political philosophy a la rawls etc, things like the whole linguistic turn, pragmatism, various philosophy of mind problems all have impact on social theory and sciences, which in turn have political impact.
|
I don't think its hard to become rich if thats what you really want. Of course you will have to make sacrifices, such as getting up at 5am every morning, working all the time, postponing other things such as family and entertainment, saving money/living within your means.
Most people would be happy making less money and having more time/less responsibility. Working in a job is really the path of least resistance, so there isn't as much competition for people trying to get rich as you think (although the competition among the few that are is fierce).
|
azndsh, you seem quite a bit like me from a couple years back, a smart guy into Math/CS but lacking much motivation in general. Personally, I considered finance sort of jobs as well, knowing that they'd fit my strengths and make a fair bit of money. But the culture didn't seem like something I wanted to get into, and I think it would've been hard for me to get much satisfaction from what feels like skimming money out of the system, imho. (You can say i-banking helps make the economy more efficient by allocating capital to the right companies, but I didn't really feel it.)
I got some of those relatively prestigious internships (my University's co-op system made it easier), and some of them would be great places to work, but honestly my level of motivation didn't even come close to what came naturally when I started a company. If you invent and push through an idea that doubles sales when working for someone else, you get a pat on the back and probably a few thousand in bonus. But if you do it in your own company, you can double your salary if you want... and it's really very possible to double things at small scales. Flexibility, control, helping people, etc. are great too.
But Chill is absolutely right in saying that it's very hard. You don't need to be intrinsically special (it's pretty clear you have the basic intelligence, etc. that you need), but you need to acquire certain attitudes: a massive risk tolerance, drive, constantly thinking about how to improve things, the ability to accept other people looking down on you when you're starting out, etc. It's definitely not for everyone, and honestly if you go into it just for the money, chances are there'll be some dark hour where you'll just quit -- so you might as well not even start.
Anyway, that's already a long ramble (I could keep going for ages), but I thought that alternate perspective might get you thinking. PM me if you want to talk about it more, cuz I rarely follow up on these blog threads/posts.
|
Calgary26004 Posts
On May 09 2008 04:08 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2008 01:10 Jibba wrote:On May 08 2008 23:53 ahrara_ wrote:
I have a question -- why study political theory? I'm taking an intro class this semester, and while it's been interesting, I can't see the practical value anywhere. Considering I'm around people who talk politics everyday, I'm involved in forensics, and I'm a volunteer with two political campaigns, I think that means something. Don't get me wrong, I loved international relations and comparative government, but this class just is oaifdjdsaf. I know people can't be taking Plato's ideas seriously today, so except for academic reasons, what's the point?
fuck i have this essay on Hobbes due in 4 hours dammit
Ok, maybe that's not the right question. I mean I can see the value of a lot of the theory, and I understand what a big influence it is. I just don't see the point of reading the original text and analyzing it. That's what I'm saying, except you're talking about political philosophy. Political theory is different. It's stuff like social movement theories, etc. Really quite close to sociology. As for Hobbes, you should analyze it in context with his historical setting since obviously the English Civil War had a large effect on him. You can parallel it to modern settings and they way journalists/philosophers write about society today. my interest extends quite far from political philosophy proper, i only say political philosophy because most of my other interests are extensions of problems in political and moral philosophy. for example, my interest in metaphilosophy is in part due to the importance of a good account of multiculturalism/relativism, and my interest in social theory and the social sciences is motivated by the recognition that merely having a good ideal or the so called political will is not enough to achieve social objectives. so an assessment of social structures and mechanisms is important. but, since political philosophy is most sincerely engaged with the normative foundation of everything political, i feel it is the proper starting point of reflection. this is to say, it provides an orientation that gives direction to the practical pursuits. in terms of choosing a field, the most important thing for me is the potential for doing something substantial. the position of political philosophy is quite interesting. it may potentially have a lot of impact, being the foundation deep theory of a variety of social normative disciplines, at least in the english speaking circles. things like law and a variety of public policy stuff. on the other hand, by merely doing political philosophy as it is now, mainly concerned about normative political ideologies, i do think it is severely limited, or, the work is already done, and all that remains is to transcribe the influence into more practical fields.
God I hate you.
Edit: Like read that last beefy runon sentence and tell me that is actually how you think, and you're not just trying to sound smart?
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 09 2008 05:40 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2008 04:08 oneofthem wrote:On May 09 2008 01:10 Jibba wrote:On May 08 2008 23:53 ahrara_ wrote:
I have a question -- why study political theory? I'm taking an intro class this semester, and while it's been interesting, I can't see the practical value anywhere. Considering I'm around people who talk politics everyday, I'm involved in forensics, and I'm a volunteer with two political campaigns, I think that means something. Don't get me wrong, I loved international relations and comparative government, but this class just is oaifdjdsaf. I know people can't be taking Plato's ideas seriously today, so except for academic reasons, what's the point?
fuck i have this essay on Hobbes due in 4 hours dammit
Ok, maybe that's not the right question. I mean I can see the value of a lot of the theory, and I understand what a big influence it is. I just don't see the point of reading the original text and analyzing it. That's what I'm saying, except you're talking about political philosophy. Political theory is different. It's stuff like social movement theories, etc. Really quite close to sociology. As for Hobbes, you should analyze it in context with his historical setting since obviously the English Civil War had a large effect on him. You can parallel it to modern settings and they way journalists/philosophers write about society today. my interest extends quite far from political philosophy proper, i only say political philosophy because most of my other interests are extensions of problems in political and moral philosophy. for example, my interest in metaphilosophy is in part due to the importance of a good account of multiculturalism/relativism, and my interest in social theory and the social sciences is motivated by the recognition that merely having a good ideal or the so called political will is not enough to achieve social objectives. so an assessment of social structures and mechanisms is important. but, since political philosophy is most sincerely engaged with the normative foundation of everything political, i feel it is the proper starting point of reflection. this is to say, it provides an orientation that gives direction to the practical pursuits. in terms of choosing a field, the most important thing for me is the potential for doing something substantial. the position of political philosophy is quite interesting. it may potentially have a lot of impact, being the foundation deep theory of a variety of social normative disciplines, at least in the english speaking circles. things like law and a variety of public policy stuff. on the other hand, by merely doing political philosophy as it is now, mainly concerned about normative political ideologies, i do think it is severely limited, or, the work is already done, and all that remains is to transcribe the influence into more practical fields. God I hate you. Edit: Like read that last beefy runon sentence and tell me that is actually how you think, and you're not just trying to sound smart?
Agreed. :x
I just spent a semester reading thousands of pages on social movement theory and modern philosophy, and I had no idea what he was trying to say.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
lolwut. i dont try to sound smart, just trying to cover all the bases. it is just that when i am writing casually, i tend to revise things as the sentence goes on, add more explanations, etc.
the issue is not that complicated. various social related fields are political by nature, and some of the politics i disagree with. so political philosophy is good for both thinking about and talking about the political problems in these fields. i'll only do philosophy hardcore if i can see a good original contribution, which is probably not going to happen.
anyway, not going to mess with this blog any more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
