Most EAs studies math, CS, economics or philosophy in their college. Due to the expectation of AI development, CS seem to be the most popular major for EAs. Some argue that biology major is worse than CS. There are lots of biological cause areas which EA can work in: impactful medicine, mental health, biotech(like transhumanism), wild animal welfare, cultured meat, sentience, brain computer interface... But some still agrues that biology major isn't good enough because:(1)Biology is narrower than CS, CS can be used in any subjects(2)Biology is easier(3)Biology is too broad, you only need to know some expertise for your cause area(4)People in math or CS can easily go in these researches, only needing a few biology self-learnings to make themselves speciailized. I'm not very sure if (2)-(4) are right. I can't imagine the biology professionalism can be replaced that easily. I think CS engineers can cooperate with biologists, like bioinformatics. But biology research professors requires a lot of knowledge of biology in your major. If I want to do these bio research topics, are there other reasons that makes biology a useless major? Do any biologists in EA against that biology is more useless ?
Thank you for answering, some of the points are new that I haven't considered about. What do you work in ML? AI safety? I want to know what EA-related things I can work in CS besides reducing AI x-risks. If I insist in working on those bio-related topics, is it still worth getting a CS major and fewer bio?(for bioinformatics and other CS-related skills)