You’re graduating into a job market that is already arguing with itself about whether your degree still matters. AI is not a distant threat. It is already chewing on the entry-level work that used to be the on-ramp — including in computer science, which was supposed to be the safe bet.
The last few decades told you to pick a narrow lane and become the person nobody could replace. That advice assumed the lane would still be there. A specialist is efficient until the thing they specialized in gets automated. Then they are a single crop in a blight year.
The better shape is older than this panic: one deep skill, and a wide enough base that you can move when the ground moves. People call it T-shaped. I think of it as being useful in more than one conversation.
That looks like:
- The engineer who has read enough philosophy to ask whether the thing should be built
- The marketer who understands psychology well enough to know what they are actually selling
- The doctor who can hear a patient's story, not just a chart
AI is getting good at the narrow technical task. It is still bad at the human joints: judgment, persuasion, ethics, seeing the connection between two rooms. Those are not "soft skills." They are the skills that let you change your mind without starting your career over.
So the useful question is not only "what job does this degree get me?" It is "what kind of thinking is this training?"
Take the literature class. Learn to write a clear paragraph. Practice explaining a hard thing to someone who does not share your vocabulary. Work on the parts of yourself that do not autocomplete: courage, honesty, a point of view.
You do not need to become a cartoon polymath. You need a craft, and enough range that the craft still has somewhere to stand when the tools change.
The graduates who will be fine are not the ones who outrun the models. They are the ones who can still decide what the work is for.