I've heard many complain they didn't take calculus in HS...

I've heard many complain they didn't take calculus in HS, but never heard someone complain they didn't take more courses on poetry or history.

Does this imply humanities are worthless af?

Other urls found in this thread:


Worthless? No, just less practical and easier to understand.

It's harder to get a good grade in the social sciences than in pure sciences. This being said, you can't compare each to the other, as they require different levels of skill or expertise.

I have a Masters in History and I can assure you I did it in my sleep. Its the only major where you can press your Professor up against a bar wall and make-out with. STEM major can prove me wrong doe.

No, it's not.

All my friends who got BAs almost never had any work to do. Getting a good grade on an essay is just about sounding as pretentious and pseudo-intellectual as possible while feeding into your professors political philosophy.

>t's harder to get a good grade in the social sciences than in pure sciences
No its not. The humanities professor telegraph their opinions. All you have to do is imitate what they want you say.

>It's harder to get a good grade in the social sciences than in pure sciences

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Have you taken a science class beyond your freshman year astronomy class?

Studying the humanities isn't very useful for the purpose of practical employment, but they're not worthless. Knowing about them makes you a more well-rounded person.

>The Tab
Some girl at my university was taking credit for starting this webzine or whatever it is.
I should have known she didn't actually start it.

This is my last semester working on my BA in history and honestly all of my upper level classes have been taken along with grad students and required incredibly long hours of reading and writing. My roommate, in his final year of mechanical engineering technology BS, almost never has any homework to do. I would say that from what I have observed, a BA track is much more intellectually rigorous but that comes with interpretation.

Professor just told a story about the deli owner he went to while he was in college noticed his copy of Dante's Inferno and started reciting the story from memory.

My professor was surprised and wanted to know where he learned that and he said he studied medieval history in Italy (forgot the town) and specialized in literature including the Dante's Inferno.

Managed to put his kids through college and he's still making sandwiches to this day. Thinking about going to visit his deli actually.

Anyway, point is, don't worry humanities majors. One day you might find a delicatessen owner to talk about humanities with and you might even own a deli one day! Or teach!

>Tfw took stem shit through calc 2 (yes I passed it) before switching to history
Never been happier. I feel like a human again.

Of course you can have a university where history or whatever essays require tonnes of research and hours of error free work and interpretation. But if I told you to go and learn Mongolian for 4 years and write a novel and 10 poems and a newspaper in the language then that would require all those qualities as well. Now the same but replace Mongolian with Hentai porn.

Some people claim that humanities students have a monopoly on rigour or critical thinking. Rigour is simply the absence of fallacies. Critical thinking is simply rigour along with using existing ideas. Maybe my definitions are wrong but I hope you agree that only a deluded consumer whore student could think that you need a degree to obtain these qualities.

My problem with humanities degrees is that the framework needed to create quality work is arbitrary and inconsistent. In practice, being a renowned person in these fields relies on subjective perceptions related to self promotion.

I'm on my phone so I can't be bothered to write what I fully think but my opinion is that if the degree isn't teaching you general, widely applicable, theoretical ideas, it's a worthless waste of time. My engineering degree was worthless and the only worthwhile degrees are maths, physics, and parts of computer science

>you might even own a deli
But my humanities education taught me that owning things is capitalism

>I've heard many complain they didn't take calculus in HS
Where the fuck are people not taking at the very least precalc in HS?

Whats your point?

Lots of burnt out lawyers go into politics, MBA grads might start small businesses, engineers might start small tech shops.

A degree isnt a life-sentence dummy.

And capitalism is good!

Humanities don't make you money, they get you cultured.

Not everything in life needs to be valued by the dollar. Past a certain point where you have enough to live comfortably things like culture and philosophy start to matter.

It's literally Maslow' Hierarchy of needs. If you are broke don't study humanities, you need food and housing first.

I think that was his point, dummy

But my humanities education taught me that it's destroying the planet :(

More like it's destroying humanities.

Shut the fuck up.

>Anyway, point is, don't worry humanities majors. One day you might find a delicatessen owner to talk about humanities with and you might even own a deli one day! Or teach!

Yeah, he's really advocating for history majors with this point. My bad.

>mfw my sociology professor talks about the education bubble and I think about what's going to happen to this smug bastard when the university system collapses

History was easy and Social Science was MAD fucking easy, basically a class for life drop-outs. I needed 1 social science class in canader and it was boring as fuck, I was practically twiddling my thumbs the whole time. Meanwhile I flunked Math pretty hard. Lunch break is over, back to Starbucks.

Oh i definitely accept its harder [spoiler] finding employment [/spoiler] with a BA than a BScs :^)

>It's harder to get a good grade in the social sciences than in pure sciences.
One of those uninformed opinions

Do you have a problem with teaching??

And according to my professor, his sandwiches are goddamn beautiful and he put children through college in that shop. Maybe you're underestimating the need for sandwich artists educated in the classics.


I've a BScs in Sociology. Where is your God now.

Poetry and history are considered topics that you can do on your own. Sadly, you cannot say the same about math even if you can completely complement your knowledge on your own.

>More intelligent

>Less intelligent than drama.


Im majoring in Bio and Philosophy. Ill say that while my coureload for my bio and chem classes is much greater, the PHI classes require much more critical thinking skills and as a whole are much more challenging.

Theres no excuse for being bad at math, at least if youre going to shit on those same people for not being bad writers.

Overall being a polymath of sorts is the best option. Theres no reason to limit yourself - learn the science AND the humanities and learn how to synthesis your knowledge.

>Bio fag can only get critical thinking skills through Philosophy
That was a shocker.

>business administration
>less intellegent
>more mathematical
actually probably true

>implying Social sciences arent killing both the humanities and the Natural sciences.
Its literally just the worst of both areas, without the reliability of actual science or the human insight of the humanities.

This. Polymath here.

Definitely on course to study Comp Lit and Philosophy at Reed College, but haven't decided on a science to pursue.

>Theres no excuse for being bad at math
At least for basic math, that's true. Hell, even "hard" stuff like Calc is conceptually fairly simple.

For higher levels of math, though, it's pretty understandable that many people don't get it. Hell, I still don't entirely understand why the fuck Laplace transforms work.

Never said that at all. My Ecology and Conservation Bio classes required a lot of critical thinking, but my Chem classes are just equation after equation. I dont even mind chem, it just undenyably doesnt take much critical thinking. My physics classes require a bit more but not much more.

Eh, it just takes more work. Understanding the guts of something in math doesn't really mean having an intuitive or graphical image of it, but rather being able to manipulate at your will.
Well obviously your chemistry and physics courses aren't going to be at the highest level of complexity. The critical thinking skills you need when solving many problems is a merit of its own. You are taught plug and chug because brilliant minds could solve those problems.

philosophy top tier

>history of science


truth desu
>muh econ major bubble
but yeah, shit's the unfortunate fragmentation of political economy
that's actually a very solid combo if he's even relatively interested in law
one of the top lsat majors + stem to open more doors in employment

shit tier list lmao

BA & BS master race here as well. The BA in Art was my dream at the time but the BS in Maths was an acceptable alternative for the inevitable realization of how little financial gain many of the careers in art offer compared to the education needed (Master's or higher).

I wish the mods could just delete these threads. It's almost as bad as the old "is god real" threads on Veeky Forums way back - unless they still have them. I fucking hope not.

It must be nice to be in STEM, which hasn't been fucking castrated by school boards and fucking budget cuts. Every other year the Department of Education is like MUH STEM and demands more even though the amount of jobs in those fields are limited as fuck, while the Humanities just gets itself shit all over to names and dates. Science's only fucking controversy in High School classrooms is evolution - everything in history is a goddamn controversy because it colors perceptions of the present and lends itself to political bullshit by being edited in this way. Man, how difficult for you guys. I couldn't even begin to learn anything new until I got into 300-level history classes where the normal surface bullshit is fucking gone, but even then the professors have to deal with students from a denuded and debased program.

I don't get your point.

>We have to chug a bottle of wine and weep over Sparknotes'

As an econfag obtaining a BA, the fact that you can go to Sparknotes and learn what you need to know disproves the thesis. BSc's are harder than BA's, I could never do a BSc.

>STEM is largely unadulterated
>Humanities (especially history) is molested by politics and budget cuts, creating an inferior product

Your post is exactly why I'm right.

>citation needed

That's due to your shitty academic system.

I don't think most people take it, at least not here in Canada.

Nice reply, really thought out. Thanks for repeating exactly what I said. You'll make it far,sadly.

>Your inability to state your point clearly is because im a dumb stemlord xd

As someone who did both Bachelor of Engineering then went back and did history. Social Sciences are WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY fucking harder. My fucking god, so many times I almost dropped out.

>Here write about the formation of Stalinist bureaucracy in 1000 words in a week.

>End up writing 3000 words just covering the bare minimum

>Most of your sources aren't even in fucking English so you have to spend days machine translating entire chapters of books.

>You can fail if your argument/interpretation isn't good enough.

Seriously, anyone who thinks Social Sciences are easy subjects should fuck off. I'm pretty sure I developed a severe anxiety disorder from how fucking bullshit hard these subjects are.

Maybe not everyone is suited for everything.

Engineering does have a lot of work, but nowhere close to history.

A lot of my classmates got by doing fucking jack shit. My best friend literally didn't go to a single lecture for 3 years and still passed with honours.

In a way Engineering is pretty straight forward, though it's turned into a worthless degree. I actually came to the conclusion my degree was hurting my job prospects,.

People seriously underestimate the crazy levels of coursework in the humanities, and how fucking bullshit the assignments actually are.

No, the Humanties is just literally bullshit hard. You get 3 papers to write dumped on you at any moment (seriously, you will be writing papers almost every day you are doing the course) and they are often incredibly vague, require sources out the wazoo for often very niche events.

For example, the formation of Stalinist bureaucracy, you think there would be a lot of books on this, but no, there is barely fucking anything, most of the shit I found was in Russian as well. Most of the english language stuff was from a Trotskyist viewpoint.

You have to sift through all of that bullshit, interpret the parts you think are important, then write a convincing argument and interpretation of the events while trying to not just plagiarize the sources then on top of that if it wasn't hard enough, they give you these bullshit word limits that are near impossible to stay under and for you to stay under it, you have to cut 50%+ of your writing and points, but then you have to make a call of what to cut and what is relevant to the argument or not. One of these that you cut, might be essential in view of your tutor and thus you will fail or get a greatly reduced mark.

None of this shit I had to face while in Engineering, ever.

Replies every time. This picture is the baitiest.

You are just shit m8. I see the same reaction from people in the humanities with any sort of mathematical work.

>entire article on why BAs are hard and how it's difficult to write stories and theses

God I hate this gay fucking earth. REVELATIONS WHEN

Vanity doesn't become you, my dear.

They are completely different.

STEM is largely based around rote memorization, remember this formula where social science is largely based around interpretation and critical thinking.

As 5+5 will always equal 10, but a historical argument will always be subjective because of your biases, your sources biases, ideology etc, which you have to cut through and then present a convincing argument making sure every single one of your points is sufficiently backed up.

There is a reason 95% of my fucking Engineering class that actually passed LITERALLY COULDN'T SPEAK ENGLISH. Because writing and interpreting arguments, language and ideology is not important to engineering. Numbers are a universal language which are quite easy to grasp once you get it and memorize it. Completely different from the interpretation of history like you have to do in history.

I'm literally not kidding as well, 95% of my class were Chinese princelings who drove around in BMWs, lived in the most expensive uni lodgings and couldn't speak english, you would be stuck in a group assessment (something as well that never happens in Social Sciences) and you couldn't even speak to who you were fucking stuck with.

You are likely being sincere and from a practical standpoint insofar as salary determines worth in a capitalist society, you are likely correct given that a humanities specialization likely implies that one will not receive much of a paycheck. On the flip side, a humanities education teaches you to be open-minded, and if you're fortunate it teaches you how to appreciate life irrespective of your salary. I think the author of that article is fucking up, but I respect the opinion unless I feel like trolling or posting pure satire.

it's only easy if the instructor makes that choice. take for example harvard: the general psychology/intro psychology course taught by prof pinker is the hardest course for freshmen

Math is much more complex than 5+5=10 just as history is more complex than "who was the first President of the United States?"

Sure, you can memorize, but even a high school pre-calc student trying to find f''(x) of f(x)=(e^2x-8)/(3cos4 - sin4) will have a hard time if he makes even an error with a positive or negative sign.

I'm in first year econ so I can't go in to incredible detail about university courses, but when I was in high school I can tell you that calculus, vectors, and functions were significantly harder than politics, history, and philosophy, even if I was getting higher grades in them.

In an essay, if you make an error somewhere you can always go back and fix it. In sciences/math, one error could mean that you have to restart the entire thing, especially if it is recurring. Forming an argument with limited space may not be easy, but math and science is much fucking harder.

This may be b8, but if not, this is an example of the deep ,modern, misunderstanding of STEM. The fact that there are not multiple answers (even though there could be) doesn't mean that getting to an answer is easy. Yes you could look online most of the answers but that really takes you so far. Understanding what you are doing and generating an effective method to attack a problem is anything but simple. If you ever want to produce original work, you need to have this clear.

That's because no one takes history courses in High School.

What fucking highschool did you went


Reminder to all the STEM fags in this thread.

I'm not saying STEM isn't hard. I'm not saying Math isn't hard, I'm not even saying there isn't times in STEM we need to engage in critical thinking and communication. But STEM for the most part unless you are off into weird experimental shit will always be a million times more straight forward than Humanities. The course load for Engineering was a 10th of the course load I have for History.

95% of my engineering course was just fucking gooks copying off each other, they wouldn't even hide it as well, a few of them could speak english, then the rest would just copy off them. My best friend largely used to just copy off me.

You can't copy in humanities, I've seen students officially warned for having paragraphs similar to eachother. In Engineering, I never had these crazy as fuck interpretive essays thrown onto me non-stop every single fucking week.

And here is the worst thing about STEM. STEMlords who literally think they are the greatest thing in the universe, but are autistic retarded pieces of shit once they step out of their field. The arguments I get into with STEMlords my god.

If I have to hear another STEMlord go on about how fucking "Logical" he is or "that's just logic" in a fucking intepretation of politics, sociology or history, I'm probably going to write a snarky comment on facebook for facebook likes.

Again, I don't think STEM isn't hard and I think STEM is massively important (despite how useless my engineering degree is, though I do have a nice certificate as well from an engineering guild) but the attitude against the humanities that is present in the media, in academia and especially from STEM students is complete and utter bullshit, especially with how fucking hamstrung humanities is in funding, while STEMlords try to grapple why they can't explain basic fucking science to the general public like Climate Change.

I heard a 15 year old say the same shit.

Well, then the myths about engineering are true, you get pragmatic dumbed down shit. Have you ever dealt witha proof that isn't half a page long? Have you ever had to invest weeks in a couple of problems? Have you ever had to scrutinize over thousands of data points and getting a rigorous and well presented (which means well written) report?

No one is downing humanities or history, but you are delusional if you think either subject is inherently more difficult than the other.

Trips checked.

I took calculus in college (it wasn't an HS course at the time). If I had it to do over again, I would have taken Accounting instead. I've never worked an integral on the job, and I'm sure knowing something about debits and credits would have been helpful.

Sure you have. Meanwhile, every goddam 12 year old adlibs some one-liner from Bill The Good Goy Science Guy, and Neil DeShill Tyson all day long.

I mean, did you actually listen to what the guy said, or does the existence of edgy teenagers who have read Nietzsche's wiki page make you discount everything he has ever said?

Knowing how to use what you learned is as important as learning those ticky trig substitutions. Accounting isn't just add this and multiply this you know, it also has some complicated mathematical work. It's like the people who think they should learn statistics instead of calculus because their knowledge of statistics is how to take the arithmetic mean and how to click linreg in a ti-82.

It was not eye opening

>machine translating
Can you do that? Wouldn't there be heaps of errors, thus resulting in a false claim?

because engineering grads own their own factories...right? oh no, wait, your just a cog in apple/microsoft/british oil/ whatever....

Of course it wasn't. Because 2+2=4, is the same as "My moral system is the correct one and yours is wrong" in your head.

the fuck are you saying lmao
most murican high schools require 3 or 4

gotta love that empty bottom-left quadrant

Lol nigga, I'm not even in STEM

You imply that humanities are worthless as fuck, based on an n=1 observation. Go read Popper.

Veeky Forums major who was quad stem junior when I switched majors here. I can say from experience that stem lower division is harder than humanities lower division. The opposite is true for upper divisions in terms of workload.

That's not true faggit

>computer programming
>more mathematical than math

I've got a PhD in classics which I found pretty easy to get. Just a lot of language learning over five years but now I'm studying medicine. Not a lot harder in terms of the work, it's just that there is a lot more memorising which takes a shit load more time. The terms are pretty easy to remember since I learned Latin and Greek but I'm regularly putting in 90 hours a week as opposed to 65 with my doctorate.

I've just done my dissertation in BSc Archaeology, I honestly didn't find it that difficult to do, just long. Literally cataloguing artefacts, putting them on a map and analysing their typology and styles. It was a fun project because it was original and primary research but it really wasn't challenging beyond putting the effort in to get it done.

Is that article ironic or serious? I really can't decide. There are people who would actually mean this.

Kek. I got a Ba in International Relations, I attended literally like 2 classes / week, didn't do jack and the first time I checked the material was the night before the final exam on each subject. It was really, really hard.

>Is that article ironic or serious? I really can't decide.
Maybe you should have taken a BA.

nice one


Calculus is barely real math. It's mostly practicing mechanical calculations. It's treated more seriously in later classes on e.g. Real Analysis.

Actual math requires a lot of critical thinking and a decent amount of creativity too. And crazy preservance at times.

It is true. In terms of workload, any 300 level physics course was well staggered and light compared to history courses where you read hundreds of pages daily and write dozens of pages per month. That doesn't even factor into the reality that is senior seminar at my college. For the STEM degrees, your department picks your research, which is not necessarily original in any way, and holds your hand through the project. For my history seminar, I had to write an original thesis using majority primary documentation. My girlfriend is a bio major and for her seminar she just set up cameras in national forest land, went camping and hiking, and documented wildlife migration. The engineering majors fucking turned text into audio files as a way to "securely" transmit date. I can honestly say, I worked harder as an individual than either the bio majors or engineering did as a group.

>My girlfriend is a bio major and for her seminar she just set up cameras in national forest land, went camping and hiking, and documented wildlife migration.

The data collection is far easier (and more enjoyable) than the data analysis though.

In this case, it wasn't. They ended up looking through a total of 600 photos as a group of 10 for porcupines. If they found a porcupine, they'd just mark the camera location and note the reemergence of porcupines in that grid number. STEM a lazy shit.

As someone who has a BA i can confirm this