I don’t buy the assumption that seems to be implied that many arguments have to be weak and a single argument has to be strong.
Why not have many strong reasons instead of one weak reason?
Certainly for complex questions I find multi-threaded answers more convincing than single-threaded ones.
Fox over hedgehog for me.
In terms of picking a major, do something you enjoy that you can conceivably use to get a job. You can actually get a job with a philosophy degree. I did… after I quit accounting because it was too darn boring…
Why not have many strong reasons instead of one weak reason?
There are contexts in which one doesn’t have access to many strong arguments.
In terms of picking a major, do something you enjoy that you can conceivably use to get a job. You can actually get a job with a philosophy degree. I did… after I quit accounting because it was too darn boring...
I’ll clarify that I wasn’t arguing that one should major in a quantitative subject — my discussion was restricted to earnings, not to the holistic impact of majoring in a given subject.
I don’t buy the assumption that seems to be implied that many arguments have to be weak and a single argument has to be strong.
Why not have many strong reasons instead of one weak reason?
Certainly for complex questions I find multi-threaded answers more convincing than single-threaded ones.
Fox over hedgehog for me.
In terms of picking a major, do something you enjoy that you can conceivably use to get a job. You can actually get a job with a philosophy degree. I did… after I quit accounting because it was too darn boring…
There are contexts in which one doesn’t have access to many strong arguments.
I’ll clarify that I wasn’t arguing that one should major in a quantitative subject — my discussion was restricted to earnings, not to the holistic impact of majoring in a given subject.