Thursday, July 19, 2007

The Generosity of Philosophy Students





Below 65%
Teacher training in math & natural sciences: 54.8%
Business economics: 58.7%
Italian studies: 61.4%
Teacher training in humanities & social sciences: 62.9%

Over 80%
Sociology: 81.3%
Ethnology: 82.7%
Philosophy: 83.6%



2nd year: 86.9% (of 289)
3rd year: 85.2% (of 250)
4th year: 85.2% (of 236)
5th year: 82.5% (of 171)
6th year: 83.1% (of 136)
7th year: 81.3% (of 107)
8th year or more: 73.2% (of 183)






Edouard said...

Great stuff, Eric.

You correctly notice that philosopher's contribution decreases over time.

Of course, it seems clear that this decrease has nothing to do with studying philosophy, since the effect is also found in other fields. Possible explanations are not hard to invent. It might be that as students get older, they depend less and less on their parents. Futhermore, older students might have needs that younger do not have (e.g., children for the older ones, etc.).

It would also be interesting to look at how much philosophy students give to charities, if you have the raw data, instead of merely looking at the proportion of students who give to charities. It might be that students give more as they get older, even though less students give.

With respect to the explanation you propose, philosophy students seem overall to be more liberal than their peers. It might be that liberals give more to charities.


Dan said...


I'm not familiar with the Swiss educational system, but a quick google suggests that many students get their degree after 4-5 years. So it may be that students who finish in 4-6 years tend to be relatively generous, and those who need more than 6 or 7 years tend to be relatively ungenerous. If the generous students are getting their diplomas, not dropping out, then I believe that "depressingly" is misplaced. Is there information in the data set on which students get their diplomas and how long they take, which would make it possible to check for this?

Eric Schwitzgebel said...

Thanks for the kind words, Edouard! I agree that the decrease has nothing to do with studying philosophy; there's even a (non-significant) trend for studying philosophy to reduce the decrease.

It would indeed be interesting to look at differences in the amounts given, but unfortunately that's not possible with these data, since the amounts given to the charities are fixed: CHF 7 (about US $4) to the needy student fund and CHF 5 (about US $3) to the foreign student fund.

Good point, Dan! The data I have can partly address your comment. Unfortunately, I don't have data on whether students who have stopped attending did so because they completed their degrees, but I do have overall time-course data. The drop off in enrollments really accelerates around Year 6. The decline in giving is steady after the second semester, and definitely continues after Year 6. So the truth might be somewhere between my pessimistic interpretation and your optimistic one. Maybe when I prepare the final analyses for publication I'll take a more careful look at the issue, examining the time course for particular students who leave before the fourth year.

Tucker Lieberman said...

Perhaps philosophy students, conscious of the dearth of philosophy jobs available upon graduation, have idealistic attitudes towards money, while teacher candidates, who expect to begin with a modest income of about $30,000, have a more pragmatic approach and count their pennies more carefully. The typical philosophy student does not have a firm preconception of how much money she or he will have five years after graduation, and may possibly overestimate, thus choosing to donate more than her peers have chosen to donate.

It may also be the case that philosophy students come from families that worry less about money, and hence are less concerned when their child chooses one of the more "theoretical" majors. By "worrying less about money," I am not suggesting that they come from wealthier families (although they might), but rather that their families might value a good liberal arts education and generosity above having a skill in a specific trade or profession and earning a particular salary. I do not think the question of charitable donations is separable from overall attitudes towards money.

-- Tucker (B.A. in Philosophy, currently working in finance)

alex said...

it could be that people who choose certain types of degree have certain types of attitudes. in this case, economy students tend to be more "rational egoists" and so "less altruistic".

i study sport ethics and in this field there is a similiar question: does sport makes people more "competitive" (read: more "egocentric" like the champions of our sports)?

in the '70s a study demonstrated that people with a strong attitude toward personal achievement (regardless of an ethical way to play the game) come to sport to have satisfaction. so, the old adagio "sport builds character", a new one could be more accurate: "sport reveals character".

even in sport people can be divided in the two categories of more or less generous.

i don't think that wealthy people chose philosophy and bacause thet're wealthy they can affor generosity. at least, not here in europe (i'm italian); here it's just the opposite, i would say: wealthy peole choose economics.

two data are problematic: students of teacher training not generous, and the decrease over the years. for the first, i don't know; but the second can be explained: when you pass the 4 or 5 year you pay higher taxes, you are older and your parent's support is less than in the first years - you must spare money for yourself. that's all.

so, generally, i think it's a matter of attitude (and the education you received from your parents)

Eric Schwitzgebel said...

Nice comments, Tucker and Alex!

Tucker, your analysis seems very plausible. This could well be the best interpretation of those aspects of the data.

Alex: Now you've made me wonder to what extent sport has an effect on character. If you have some references on this, I'd be interested to see them. As for wealthier students choosing economics, that may be so. I just don't have the data; and it may vary country-to-country. I don't even know if wealth is associated with higher rates of giving to these charities. Your explanation of the decline in charitable giving with years of education (I should also mention with age, which is obviously related) in terms of having to be more self-supportive seems a reasonable conjecture.

It all seems pretty conjectural, except for the following (which is what I came to the data to think about): Studying philosophy doesn't have much affect on one's rates of charitable giving.

Eric Schwitzgebel said...

Whoops, one thing in tension with Alex's explanation for the decline in giving is the fact that individual students are more likely to increase than to decrease their rates of giving over time....

Genius said...

as peopel grow older they become more right leaning and less idealistic. So it could be that.

Also they may become disenchanted by their specific charities and just not have the time to find a new one.