All about my inane ideas

Thursday, September 1, 2011

Admissions Interviews, Round 2

Q. Why do you want to study psychology?
A. Well, it's a really good science.

Q. Why do you want to study psychology?
A. I've always been interested in humans, what it means to be human, feelings, motivation. I really like psychology and philosophy.
Q. What do you see as the difference between psychology and philosophy?
A. I don't know! I will study psychology to find out!

Q. Why did you like this book?
A. It, like, had a lot of information that I wasn't, like, aware of..?

Q. What did you find most interesting in this book? Was there anything that surprised you?
A. I was surprised that animals don't perceive! I know bears eat a lot before winter, birds make nests, I didn't realize they don't perceive the way humans do!
Q. Hhmmm. I'm not sure that is what the author was saying. What do you mean animals don't perceive?
A. Well, humans have a brain.


3 comments:

  1. Well I trust You explained to the second person that the distinctions between academic disciplines are pretty much arbitrary and shouldn't be taken seriously at all (except insofar as to enable a career in academia, which I assume the applicants in question are not at risk of).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, no, since I disagree with Your premise. I think content is arbitrary but the way people are taught to reason and come to some sort of decision about truth is very different among disciplines.

    ReplyDelete
  3. OK, I think what you're saying is that Philosophy is not so into empirical studies. In general though, I don't think academic disciplines distinguish themselves by their methodology: it's more about the content, which we agree is pretty much arbitrary. Computer Science, for example, has no unifying methodology: some guys run experiments, others prove theorems, etc. The only unifying thing is that it must have something to do with computation.

    ReplyDelete

Blog Archive

Followers