Note that none of the criteria appear to have anything to do with how enjoyable or fulfilling the people in each occupation found their work on average. Surely this omission explains the odd parity between, for example, philosophers and parole officers, or the ludicrous ranking of actuaries (how many people actually *want* to be an actuary, notwithstanding what I'm sure are fine salaries and working conditions?)
After writing this I felt a little bad for badmouthing actuaries, as I realized I didn't know exactly what it is that they do (oops). So, of course, I looked it up on wikipedia (bracing stuff.)Afterwards I went to look of the entry for philosopher.. only to find that there isn't one! (It redirects to "Philosophy".) I thought this was a little shocking, but it just shows the extent to which people fail to perceive 'philosopher' as an occupation. In contrast, historians, biologists, sociologists, physicists and so forth all had fine-sized articles. The only other occupations in the top 20 that didn't have associated articles were "Industrial Designer", "Medical Laboratory Technician"", and "Motion Picture Editor." Hmph!
I knew a kid in NE that wanted to be an actuary. That's what he said, at any rate. But, anyone who says that enough you think might just be weird enough to say that sincerely.Don't know if you ever heard those Rolling Rock ads from the mid-90's that featured the guy who was a "philosopher, beer drinker" but in high school I thought it would be pretty cool to be the guy who was paid well to pontificate and drink beer on another's dime.
I didn't catch that ad, but this just makes me love the 90s all the more. And I agree that subsidized pub pontification is one aspect of the gig that is pretty rad (even if not always the most productive, idea-wise.)
Post a Comment