Skip to main content

Studying Philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London



Heythrop College is 400 years old in 2014.

I have been teaching philosophy at Heythrop College for seventeen years. This was my first full time teaching appointment after leaving Oxford. Unlike many academics keen to climb the career ladder, and who consequently tend to migrate from one institution to another at the beginning of their careers, I have stayed put. Why?

The answer lies in what I discovered when I arrived here. I quickly discovered just how unique and valuable an institution Heythrop is. We are a specialist college focussing on just philosophy and theology. We are small too, which means that students and staff not only share a passion for the same subjects, they are also known to each other. Wander the corridors of Heythrop and you’ll find people deep in conversations about philosophy and theology. Irrespective of their religious belief - or lack of religious belief - students and staff are bound together by shared, deep interested in fundamental questions about reality, morality, and the human condition. Despite our obvious differences, we form a closely-knit intellectual family.

Coming straight from Oxford, I also very much valued Heythrop’s Oxbridge-style tutorial system and the opportunity it gives students to really explore a topic with someone who knows it inside out. When the New College of the Humanities was announced, Dominic Lawson wrote in the Guardian that the New College was charging for was the tutorial system offered by Oxford and Cambridge Universities – which is "the single most valuable aspect of their educational offering". But Lawson was wrong to claim that one-to-one tutorials are only offered by Oxbridge. They also form a significant part of Heythrop’s undergraduate programme.

Heythrop’s philosophy department is a hive of activity. World-class research is being done, but I soon learned that the staff also have that rare quality: they actually enjoy teaching. That shows in the results our students achieve.

Heythrop is a unique and valuable institution. Philosophy is a unique and valuable subject. These are obviously “challenging times" for humanities degrees such as philosophy. As fees increase and the economy flatlines, prospective students with a passion for philosophy may find themselves drawn by the siren voices of those who say philosophy is an impractical, “head in the clouds” subject of little relevance to real life. The irony is that, by choosing the subject they love, philosophy students are also choosing one of the most career friendly degrees. The skills it fosters are highly transferable and valued within, for example, the business sector.
  
In support of this, take a look at GRE exam scores of those pursuing fifty different science and humanities degrees in the US. The GRE exam is sat in the third undergraduate year, and has three parts: verbal, quantitative (mathematical) and analytical. How do philosophers fare? Out of fifty science and humanities programmes, philosophy ranks first on the analytic component. It also ranks first on the verbal component. Philosophy also ranks first out of all humanities degrees on the maths component (with only maths-heavy science subjects scoring better). Philosophy also ranks first out of fifty degree programmes on the LSAT – the law school entry exam. Those studying religion also do well on these tests. The attached graph plots how the different degrees do on two of the three GRE scores. Where is philosophy? Philosophy graduates are smart all-rounders. They possess a wide range of highly transferable skills that employers value. Spread the word, please.

Heythrop is an extraordinary place. It’s time the college received the recognition it deserves. The approaching anniversary gives us an excellent opportunity to make the college better known as a hive of intellectual activity that really is both unique and of enormous benefit to the wider society in which it is located.




Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
159 comments
Read more

Aquinas on homosexuality

Thought I would try a bit of a draft out on the blog, for feedback. All comments gratefully received. No doubt I've got at least some details wrong re the Catholic Church's position... AQUINAS AND SEXUAL ETHICS Aquinas’s thinking remains hugely influential within the Catholic Church. In particular, his ideas concerning sexual ethics still heavily shape Church teaching. It is on these ideas that we focus here. In particular, I will look at Aquinas’s justification for morally condemning homosexual acts. When homosexuality is judged to be morally wrong, the justification offered is often that homosexuality is, in some sense, “unnatural”. Aquinas develops a sophisticated version of this sort of argument. The roots of the argument lie in thinking of Aristotle, whom Aquinas believes to be scientifically authoritative. Indeed, one of Aquinas’s over-arching aims was to show how Aristotle’s philosophical system is broadly compatible with Christian thought. I begin with a sketch of Arist
49 comments
Read more

Why I won't be voting Labour at the next General Election, not even to 'keep the Tories out'.

I have always voted Labour, and have often been a member of the Party, campaigning and canvassing for them. For what it’s worth, here’s my feeling about voting Labour next General Election:   1. When the left vote Labour after they move rightwards, they are encouraged to just move further right, to the point where they are now probably right of where e.g. John Major’s Tory party was. And each time the Tories go further right still. At some point we have got to stop fuelling this toxic drift to the right by making the Labour Party realise that it’s going to start costing them votes. I can’t think of anything politically more important than halting this increasingly frightening rightward slide. So I am no longer voting Labour. 2. If a new socialist party starts up, it could easily hoover up many of the 200k former LP members who have left in disgust (I’d join), and perhaps also pick up union affiliations. They could become the second biggest party by membership quite quickly. Our voting
Post a Comment
Read more