

Don't Double Major - naftaliharris
http://www.naftaliharris.com/blog/dont-double-major/

======
dalke
I don't follow the logic. The author writes "instead of double majoring, you
should take all the computational math classes and anything else that
interests you, and then major in math or CS depending on which one is easier
to get". What if you take all of the courses which interest you, and that just
happens to be enough for both a math and CS degree?

I assume many people who get multiple degrees do so because they are
interested in the topics.

That's why I got my triple degrees in math, physics, and CS. Even with years
of hindsight, I can't think of which one, much less two, degrees I would drop.
I _can_ think of which additional courses I would have taken, but I didn't
have the time for them.

The author states "you would presumably choose the schedule that maximized
this utility to you."

Someone who chooses to acquire a double major has presumably done so to
maximize utility. The author seems to say that a double major rarely maximizes
utility given the available constraints. It's hard for me to believe that the
author understands every student's goals better than the student does.

Also, the author's statement presumes that students are meaningfully able to
judge utility. The number of students majoring in "undecided", or students who
changed programs, convinces me otherwise. There are a couple of courses I
would have changed in retrospect (eg, tensor calculus), but could not make
that judgement before taking the course. Maximizing utility also requires risk
analysis.

Degree requirements exist because the degree committee (and accreditation
organization) believe they have have a better sense of overall utility than
most students. I agree with them. And for those exceptions, it's also possible
to define one's own degree program, such as Will Shortz's college degree in
enigmatology, the study of puzzles.

With that in mind, I think it's reasonable to conclude that taking courses
which fulfill the requirements for two degrees is _more_ likely to lead
towards improved utility than doing the equivalent work for one degree plus a
number of sophomore/junior-level courses.

~~~
naftaliharris
> What if you take all of the courses which interest you, and that just
> happens to be enough for both a math and CS degree?

That's great! This means, of course, that the maximum utility schedule
happened to lie in the subset of schedules satisfying both constraints, and
you so there is no utility loss. The double-major in this case is just an
added bonus of doing what you wanted to do, and I'm happy for people lucky
enough to find themselves in that situation. From my time in college, though,
I remember a number of people who were reasoning along the lines of "Well, I'm
just three boring classes away from a double major... might as well pick it up
I guess." For people in that situation, where they don't really want to take
the extra three required classes, I'm arguing that the double major isn't
worth the utility loss.

> Degree requirements exist because the degree committee (and accreditation
> organization) believe they have have a better sense of overall utility than
> most students.

Indeed, and good point: If you don't have a good sense of your utility
function, then the decision to double major is roughly equivalent to using the
implied utility function of the degree committee to help estimate your own
utility. However in this case, I'd argue that you would probably get better
results from asking a trusted professor or mentor for advice on classes to
take, since the person you ask for advice would know you better than the
degree committee.

~~~
dalke
You do like to argue that others are wrong. That rapidly gets old when that's
your first objection to anyone's criticism, as it has been in this posting.

It looks like you now agree that there are acceptable reasons for some people
to get a double major. Your original argument says that a "[d]ouble majoring
in college is a very suboptimal strategy". Have you changed your mind?

You have observed that people _do_ get double and even triple majors. Thus, if
people make rational decisions - your basic premise requires that people
maximize utility - then either your conclusion that people are making the
wrong decision must be incorrect, or you are privy to information that
students don't have.

You have not demonstrated any evidence that you have extra information. To the
contrary, you've received information from people who have stated things like
"[i]t has given me more choice".

Your response has been to challenge the judgement of those people, when the
appropriate response would be to question your own premises.

Otherwise, all you can conclude is that to those people "slightly improved
credentials" is worth "three boring classes."

FWIW, I had no "trusted professor or mentor." In any case, what's to say that
hypothetical mentor wouldn't have suggested a triple major anyway?

------
ekm2
As someone who double majored in Math and CS, I have to disagree.It has given
me more choice.I can program,but also have the choice of going to graduate
school in either Economics,Physics,Math,CS or basically anything requiring a
mathematics background.

~~~
naftaliharris
I'd argue that your ability to program is the direct result of taking CS
classes, not the direct result of majoring in CS. Similarly, I'd argue that
your ability to go to graduate school in those fields is a consequence of
taking math classes, rather than of majoring in math. (With the possible
exception of math grad school, I will admit).

The question is: By fulfilling the requirements for a double major, what does
one gain above and beyond what one would have gained by majoring in Math, but
taking a lot of CS classes? Or majoring in CS, but taking a lot of math
classes?

~~~
dalke
You believe that you understand ekm2's situation and goals better than ekm2
does? Why is that, do you think?

My question to you is, why get a degree at all? Why not just take a lot of
courses instead of fulfilling the degree requirements?

~~~
naftaliharris
> You believe that you understand ekm2's situation and goals better than ekm2
> does?

No, I don't believe that. My suggestion about the graduate schools in the
fields ekm2 named comes from having thought of some of those graduate schools
myself, but of course ekm2 would know about the specific schools and programs
ekm2 is interested in better than I would.

My question to ekm2 about why one would choose to double major vs. single
major was sincere, and the answer enlightening: in ekm2's case, the double-
major ensured that there wouldn't be scheduling conflicts or prerequisite
issues.

> My question to you is, why get a degree at all?

Because the difference between having a degree and not having one is an order
of magnitude larger than the difference between graduating with a single major
and graduating with a double major, enough to make the utility loss worth it
for most people.

~~~
dalke
> enough to make the utility loss worth it for most people

The author of the essay (I believe you are the author) says "don't double
major" and that a double major is "a very suboptimal strategy."

You now write that it's not worthwhile "for most people", which implies that
it _is_ the optimal strategy for some people.

These two statements are not in accordance. Which is it: a bad strategy for
everyone, or good strategy for only a few?

That you think it is never worth the effort therefore more likely means that
you have incomplete information about the utility of a double major, and not
that the myriad of people with double majors have made the wrong decision. I
actually think it's because you don't understand your own mental model.

Many fewer people double major than get a single major. In a utility
maximization framework, this indicates that double majoring is sometimes worth
the extra effort. In your statement here, you believe the additional utility
is an order of magnitude less than getting a degree in the first place. In
which case, if the additional effort is also an order of magnitude less
(assuming linear scaling) then it's worthwhile.

Assuming 120-130 credit hours to graduates implies 12 hours for a second
degree is an acceptable amount of additional work. You mentioned elsewhere
people who were "three boring classes" away from a double major. That's 9
credit hours, which means it's likely a reasonable decision under the model
you just proposed.

Your statements don't seem to be in agreement with your model. Can you explain
how you used that model to come to a different conclusion?

------
gwern
I see OP is as confident of his recommendation as he can be in the complete
absence of all evidence.

