> I highly doubt it. Can you quote me some example of these really excellent insights which came from people with irrelevant background? You might be intereste

> I highly doubt it. Can you quote me some example of these really excellent insights which came from people with irrelevant background? You might be interested in Paul Feyerabend's 'Against Method,' it is a similar topic to this and a pleasant read. > I still don't get it. deductive processes aren't something unique to philosophy. I studied Mathematical logic and induction more extensively than a philosophy major. The point you are making it is somehow philosohpy helps understand comp. sci. better. I fail to see how. Philosophy (particularly analytic philosophy), has a specific method breaking down problems that you don't really see elsewhere. That doesn't mean it is necessarily 'better' than another course of study... it is just a tool that I find to be useful and relatively unique to me. It seems pretty obvious to me that you can't get by at CS without acquiring knowledge of CS. The point is that the diverse background is better than being one dimensional. Note that philosophy helps my programming, not necessarily my comp sci. > I don't have a fair survey at hand. From personal experience, good programmers have excellent communication skills. It could just as easily be generalized that good programmers are smart, and smart people are good at communicating.