Career Guidance Top 5 most regretted majors(history is one of them)

Sep 2012
1,045
咸亨酒店
#2
I would have thought most people studying history would want to go into academia or 'organizations dedicated to the period they studied'. Telling us that many people achieved that doesn't seem to be that pessimistic. I doubt there were loads of history graduates crying because they didn't get their dream job in accounting or pharmacy :think:
 
Jan 2013
622
Texas
#3
I would have thought most people studying history would want to go into academia or 'organizations dedicated to the period they studied'. Telling us that many people achieved that doesn't seem to be that pessimistic. I doubt there were loads of history graduates crying because they didn't get their dream job in accounting or pharmacy :think:
I agree. I already know some people who regretted getting their degrees in healthcare, but not in history.
 

Bart Dale

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,095
#5
Just curious: what exactly does the 'average starting salary' mean?
Just as it sounds. A starting salary is what a person makes on their first job in after they graduate. The average starting salary is the average in the field - some would make more, some less for their first job.

So a history major, after they graduated, would make around $39,000 when hired for their first job in the History field. Some History grads could find a job for $42,000 while others might only make $36,000 per year.
 

Toltec

Ad Honorem
Apr 2008
7,923
Hyperborea
#6
Once upon a time you got a degree in an area that interests you and a job in that area too, a while back you got a degree in an area that interests you or one that got you a job. Now as no degree gets you jobs you may as well get one in an area that interests you, if you enjoy it there's nothing to regret.

People entering higher education 1955 around 3%, around 8% in 1975, around 22% in 1995 and 35% now.
 
Last edited:
Likes: macon

RoryOMore

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
3,394
USA
#7
Just a note: if you're just starting out and want to get into some sort of influential field, go into the biological/genetic basis of human behavior. 20 years from now, this will supplant all other analysis in politics and business marketing.
 
Jun 2013
307
Maine
#8
^ I disagree with that.

Anyways, I detest both the attitude of "oh don't major in that you won't find a job" as well as the conditions that caused it.

First of all, a humanities education, and particularly history if you ask me, make you smarter. Plain and simple. The discipline is fantastic or learning how to craft logical arguments, analyze data, think critically, look for bias, reading skills, etc. it also offers an unparalleled understanding of the world today. It is a fantastic discipline. Academia ought to be more important in society, imo.
 
Oct 2012
510
#9
All humanitarium sciences, as I expected. Well the list is quite logical, the most important majors are those that produce something. Presented majors basically don't produce anything and have no vital need. I would say that it's much better to have history as a hobby rather than as a major. Computer science, electrical engineering, biotech, healtchare, etc are much more useful and interesting majors as a profession imho.
 
May 2013
360
UK
#10
All humanitarium sciences, as I expected. Well the list is quite logical, the most important majors are those that produce something. Presented majors basically don't produce anything and have no vital need. I would say that it's much better to have history as a hobby rather than as a major. Computer science, electrical engineering, biotech, healtchare, etc are much more useful and interesting majors as a profession imho.
Well I guess that's why people never learn from history... it's just a hobby to them...

Unless you are willing to publish articles and write books on history as a hobbyist I'm not sure if you can discount history as a 'useful major'.

There is more than one meaning behind it when I asked about the 'average starting salary'. While I understand it by taking it by face value (as Bart explained), my question is more about the point of putting that up. The idea that you get a humanities degree to earn loads of money is absurd IMO. Are you telling me that people want to get into journalism and anthropology to get rich?

If you choose to study humanities (even sciences for that matter) material gains shouldn't be a priority of yours. I'm not trying to get on a moral highground here, simply suggesting that you are choosing the wrong subjects if you want to get rich.

The problem as far as I can see is that the people who didn't recommend to others after getting the degree didn't know what they were doing when they took the course, perhaps because they were under the illusion that a uni degree will get them a brilliant job, or maybe they had different expectations from the discipline, either understimating the difficulties of studying history (it's more than just sitting around reading books), or they went in with the wrong mindset. It's one thing to take history as a hobby and another as a discipline.

Let's put it this way, if the majority of the people would treat history as a hobby, then history could be in a sense an entertainment industry, a thought entertainment industry. Now try and argue that history as a discipline doesn't produce anything.