Is anybody else here intimidated by the vast difference between the kind of intelligence / talent needed to write...

RENT FREE
E
N
T

F
R
E
E

First of all, there's a huge difference between writing a Mathematics Paper and writing an Engineering Paper. A good example is this: iota.org/IOTA_Whitepaper.pdf. It's a whitepaper for a cryptocurrency. It sounds smart, and it is smart, but ultimately they make more assumptions than you're actually supposed to make in "real" mathematics; it's not as sound.

Science Papers are somewhere between a good math paper and an engineering paper. They use minimal statistical assumptions to make statements about certain characteristics about human or animal populations or whatever.

Right now most sociology papers are shit, but psychology/neuroscience are slowly pulling that field out of the dark ages.

Good math papers don't happen often. Most people contribute meaningless iotas of information to their fields. Engineering/Science/Technology contribute more useful information on average. So it takes a really smart person to write a math paper, and a smart person to write the others.

It takes a borderline genius to publish something that is simultaneously mathematically sound and also relevant to anything outside of mathematics. Usually someone does one or the other; they'll develop the math or they'll use it in an application. Polymaths like Newton or Descartes are the big dick bois who do both.

I can pick up an instrument and play it at a competent level in less then a year going about two hours a day. I went from zero experience on classical strings to 1st string on a student orchestra in two years on cello. I even still had note markers on my fingerboard. I can't imagine even understanding where to begin to start unravelling the OP, I don't know fuckall about STEM.
Maybe it's just interests and legacy skills that determine "learning types"... but you can bet math nerds are fucking smart. I don't even think it's possible to make math entertaining.

>make math entertaining.
Most people who study pure mathematics do so because they enjoy it, find it enlightening, and aesthetically-pleasing. You'll find that physicists (especially theoretical physicists), pure mathematicians, and those of any field that is mathematics-heavy, will likely enjoy mathematics (or at least some part of it, it is very broad).

wrong

That's not true. There are multiple types of intelligence but they all factor under general intelligence or the "G factor". As G increases, so does variability in intelligence. So you can be very high in verbal intelligence and have a not terribly impressive quantitative intelligence.

This is how you get the phenomena of STEM fags who can't write for shit and humanities fags who can't do math.

brainet. the sat has a high floor and lo ceiling. look at the gre results. physics and math people have higher verbal than english majors.

humanicucks can rest assured though, business and education are the dumbest by a pretty larger margin

all unintelligence is alike just like all entropy is alike, but increasingly rare formations of any sort are unalike. like a smashed computer, dumb people have undifferentiated and broken neural components

I wasted years of my life studying STEM just to prove to myself I could actually do it.

I say "wasted" because I don't really find math/science all that interesting compared to humanities fields. It would have been much better for me to have dedicated myself to more humanities studies, so's not to be a jack of all trades/master of none.

I notice a lot of people share my insecurity, but I've met very few people who were so insecure that they actually went and got a degree in math.

I encourage anyone feeling insecure about math ability to relax and continue studying what they feel is relevant to their overall project in life. Do not go too far out of your way just to address hangups.

math is useful.

getting a humanities degree is "taking a detour" to prove your political opinions are more important

hi jordan

>virtues of racial tolerance, homosexuality, "happiness" etc.

why do you have shit taste in books?

Mathematicians can learn to write, humanities peeps can't do mathematics unless they get spoon-fed stuff about triangles by Euclid.

It just depends on the mathematical equations.

Just because there are mathematical equations does not mean the work is 'smart'.

For instance, Leon Walras' Elements of Pure Economics is a very simple book extremely similar to Carl Menger's Principles of Economics. But Walras' work is about half equations and pages and pages of graphs and there are no equations in Carl Menger's book.

You need calculus to grasp the concepts presented in Walras' book, but that doesn't make them 'smarter' that makes them worded differently.

You mean you gave up?

well
here

Learning calculus is simple, not complex. It's not hard to understand how integrals or derivatives work.

It is very difficult to fully grasp some of the concepts produced in Euclid's Elements. Specifically book XIII

Same. Got a stem degree but its all boring bullshit.

are you dumb?

calc is easy precisely because it is parsimonious and streamlined

of course deriving proofs from unformed, amorphous and possibly untrue concepts is harder

its harder to invent nuclear bombs than copy them. duh

The patrician route for life is:

Humanities Undergrad
Transfer into STEM for Grad studies
Make some money
Go back to Grad studies for Humanities

>math is useful

arithmetic is useful. doing proofs from Euclid is nearly useless as far as employers are concerned.

university is "taking a detour" from exploring the cosmos, a detour we undertake because we lack the courage, fortitude or seriousness to approach life as the vast open ended problem it is.

university makes me want to puke. I hate everything about it. I wasted years of my life there, urgent years, gone for good. It's an evil place and I'm not being hyperbolic.

It eats up millions of would-be rebels, would-be soul searchers, would-be masters of tomorrow, coulda-been artists, coulda-been lovers, and churns out:

a stockbroker
a manager
an intern
a barista living at home still dreaming
a bomb designer
a confident young executive with a penchant for consulting
a forward thinking young lady that can bring home the bacon
etc.

ruined lives spinning with color that get squished into factory assembled bottles of plastic that leach BPA into neighborhood streams and become gray water

the first aching steps of submission to an existing order that crushes all hope for resistance

the consolidation of a virtual persona conveyed via LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook, 411 friends, 42 connections, 17 likes, 3 reposts, one very solid 10 year plan, a vacation we can afford to the Carribean now that we get paid time off, a new house in the suburbs that costs 1200 to rent per month, two dogs named Wilbur and Orville, whose 8 feet on hardwood fill the house with the noise that does not come from crib, dedicated voters, rational persons, good citizens, tax payers, agnostics, wondering how Ben and Jerry could ever succeed at making ice cream, hoping death remains far off and won't hurt too bad

Rather you should say the person I am replying to is dumb, because he is trying to say exactly that, which is maybe why I was responding to him.

Wow.

>doing proofs from Euclid is nearly useless as far as employers are concerned.
I don't think that's why anyone is doing Euclidean proofs.

Although it does show you are a very intelligent individual.

Did you study pure maths or physics or something else?

I studied something else that was STEM and see my degree as bullshit but those two as absolutely the best because they give you worthwhile and fundamental tools. There is nothing else that compares and I think it is a big lie from society when they say other subjects are worthwhile at the undergraduate level

I agree that university is dumb. it makes no sense for humanities

but it kinda makes sense for math

employers DO care about your ability to do math. but it is currently illegal to test on pure math ability, even for people like financiers

theoretically you can get as much as you put in for some of hte softer fields

none of that matters if niggers destroy society though

>this is what I believe
>inb4 I'm wrong

t. PhD in algebraic geometry

>having a female name

It eats up a lot of people, but it also makes a lot of people more successful and happy than they ever would be otherwise. Most people will never want to be rebels, soul-searchers, or masters-of-tomorrow. Without college or the general structure of life, they might just choose self-destructive paths.

I recognize college wasn't for me, but for every person it cucks it makes a dozen more successful.

A significant portion of people who go to university go to get laid/meet friends/contacts. Once you're out in the real world making friends becomes incredibly difficult and university is essentially the last stop before you fuck up your life completely. I didn't go to uni and I regret it even though I know it wouldn't have helped in my career but at least I wouldn't be a literal virgin with no friends. Not everyone wants to or can be a rebel, artist, etc. Some people just want a simple life with a few real friends, a healthy romantic relationship and a decent job that pays decent money.

I'm going for a STEM degree and I hate it, I hate it all. The smugness of the self proclaimed 'scientists' (Students thinking they got everything figured out, who talk down on anything that is not STEM, talking down on philosophy, by example, whilst saying how great those pioneers in science all were, completely ignorant to the fact that most of these scientists all the way back to Ancient Greece 'practised' philosophy. Honestly those 'pioneers' would turn around in their graves would they see the current state of the STEMfag. The Academici are to knowledge what prostitutes are to love. Almost no one is actually attending those lessons out of sheer interest, it's for a degree, it's so they are allowed by the system to be a part of it. I hate it all and should probably drop out and use my time (especially now as I am - physically- at least approaching my peak around this age) to read, sport, be creative, ACTUALLY learn,... Whoever has not 2/3ds of his time for him self is a slave, no matter what is his profession. Problem is that I feel forced. It's the problem of being smarter than average, you are, because of this, socially forced to attend uni classes, to get a boring 9 to 5 job (for which you won't even need a tenth of all the shit you learned) and the only thing to get in return is muh financial stability. How do I drop out when every one around me has the Boomer mentality?

So go your own way then you cuck. Oh wait you'd rather just whine on Veeky Forums because you're too scared to get out of the system, just like everybody else in college.

Delet that pic pls

Honestly I'm hoping for a societal collapse (as caused by an economic collapse rather than by war or natural disaster) as a Deus ex Machina. It's false hope that such a thing would occur that fast, they'll probably be able to keep our economy on life support for another few decades...

Tfw over 160 iq here
:( 2/10 wouldnt recommened

this isnt that hard to understand lol
t. English and Math major

No. You don't get it. There is nothing okay about having a decent job, a decent relationship, decent friends, and a decent apartment.

Sickness and death are impending. The object of life is not to find a 20 year island where things move so comfortably and easily you don't notice yourself aging.

Your children will grow up and leave you. Your wife will age and die. Your body will start breaking down. You will have to kiss all your skills goodbye. You will struggle to find words like "underneath."

And that's just half of it.

Are you my ex-girlfriend?

You might want to consider reevaluating your life in a way not based on theoretical doomsday scenarios.

tripfags go

>he's having his existentialist crisis at age 23 and on Veeky Forums of all places

Someone buy this guy a beer. Do you want some spaghetti? I have some in my pockets

That doesn't change my opinion on universities. I'd still want to live a more natural life in which I also have time to actually learn and do things.
That been said, there is nothing wrong with 'doomsday' thinking or prepping, it is what humans have been doing for the last thousands of years up until very recently. But still, what is the difference between keeping a possible, even likely, scenario in mind as either a NEET or a wagie? In fact were I to actually base my life's decisions on 'doomsday thinking', then I would stay in college, earn big money and prep myself to death with all the money I'd earn

I remember middle school.

The data here is just arranged autistically. Mathematical Sciences has an average IQ of 130 and Physics has an average IQ of 133. Those are the two highest IQs on that spreadsheet.
t. stemfag

what did u say about existentialism
fite me faget

But you are comparing them wrongly. Of course a paper would seem more worthy than a novel without any artistic value. You can do the other way around: compare the Dvine Comedy or Don Quixote to, say, an essay written by a high school kid.

I don't think one should necessarily be smarter than the other. It's just different skills. A great work in either field would require great talent, just different ones.

there's nothing complex about this, math is just another language, equations are language games. it's like looking at a page of Chinese symbols and saying it requires a different kind of intelligence to write in.

I'm not particularly 'bad' at math, I just never invested time into developing it as a skill because I didn't find it enjoyable, it's a process oriented task that only becomes a creative endeavor once you achieve mastery of the field. Before then, the most creativity you're using is searching through your toolbox to figure out which formula will give you the correct answer. With how most math education is done these days, the average worksheet says "Hey fuckface this is how you do the problem, do it this way" and the instructor will not give you full credit if you use another method even if you reach the correct answer and show your work.

Life is a crisis. How do you not realize that by now? We should be asleep with the rocks and the dust, but here we are putting our fingers on them instead, recoiling at coldness and grit.

I remember being 12 and not having the slightest clue what the world or my life was for.

I remember not wanting to get made fun of, not wanting to look stupid, and wanting to be liked.

As far as I can tell many people are still using these foggy sensations to guide their lives

>I don't want to be alone
>I don't want to be too poor
>I don't want to be weird or disliked

That's how a child or a beast acts. Pull yourself together, Man.

Give me a better alternative then

So what's your motivation then?

>That's how a child or a beast acts. Pull yourself together, Man.

This is called projection user, I have always been the weird one and the outcast, I do not care. (Its on them, not me)
I see beauty in life and this world, and i love others as much as I love my self.
You only get 1 life user, don't fuck up.

Look for God.

We are supposed to figure out if we're supposed to do anything.

>We are supposed to figure out if we're supposed to do anything.

What are your wants and needs user.

This is rhetorical.

>Uses noise maker
>intelligent

>what are your wants and needs

Why on earth should this be a primary question? I am more interested in questions like:

>what is a person, and what is the difference between a person and a cat
>what are the moral obligations we have towards other persons
>is there a God that beckons?
>is there a purpose for which human life was ordered at creation?
>if there is no purpose in human life, how may we know for sure?
>is God real?
>what is the fate of history?
>what does a "good person" do in 2018?

Maybe "we are supposed to figure out if we're supposed to do anything" is rhetorical. It's also a nice recursive arrangement in terms of wordplay. More importantly it's a thorn in the side of the post enlightenment attitude that "I'll make my own rules for me thank you very much."

Specialization is a thing. Whoa.

>what are your wants and needs

>Why on earth should this be a primary question?
Because you don't know who you are in this world yet.

A good person would have self value, self virtue, self beliefs, and self law to rule one self with.

Use Gods laws inside your self, because you are the creator of your own experience user.

I promise you, you while uncover your other questions once you know your own relations towards them.

ChemEng here.
Only brainlets didn't develop both starting at a young age.

what are you, stupid?

the quantitative section is child's play if you can't get at least a 700 you're a brainlet.

This.

>you are the creator of your own experience user.

What's my navel for?

The point of your creation where you seperate from the divine Mother.
Everything before existence happened outside time.
Everything before creation, is the same as before existence.
Everything before self, is the same as before existence.
As everything before God, is before creation.
Literally, everything before your life happened instantly at your experience of creation.

Look into the Brahman if you don't understand the implications above.

wow really makes you think

No, I'm not intimidated by the difference between literary creativity and intelligence because I lack both.
I'm not even strong, so I can't be a day-laborer. God made me just to laugh at my sorrow.

There is no separation.
Look into yourself if you don't understand the implications above.

>Look into the Brahman if you don't understand the implications above.

this

hmm

Seperation of your mother you fucking dingus, not the literal feminem and masculine aspects of life and reality

W/e shitposter

I love the idea that the scary formulas scare you. But really, they're not THAT hard, usually, you just have to spend the time with a given paper.

t. insecure math grad

You don't know how right you are. Apocryphally, when a student asked what he would get by learning geometry, Euclid explained that knowledge was worth acquiring for its own sake and instructed his servant to give the student a coin "since he must make a profit from what he learns." Real historical event or no, the story, properly understood, B's TFO of the application-mania with which brainlets justify their existence.

grow up

do blacks thing rene is a female name

Fiction is art, retard, how can you compare them. It's like comparing a singer to a newscaster.

Fiction is art, but while the average engineer may be able to write a short story that plenty of people like, the average art-tard manchild would simply not be able to write a complex mathematical thesis on weight distribution for a planned engineering project. Art is a magnet for tryhard edgy """outsiders""" who have no marketable skills, no desire to sincerely contribute to the wider community, and no foresight. Taking a humanities degree in university - as a man - is like admitting you are a pathetic, weak, failure-orientated manchild.

Wow, are you really that stupid or you're just plain shitposting?

>this clumsy edginess
>this silly romanticizations
>these "deep" revelations about life
You have to be over 18 years of age to post on this website.

never been tested but i know that feel dood
as i've gotten older i've slowly come to the realization that i'm not in fact out of my mind.
i'm not one to hold my tongue when confronted by irrationality, so it has taken a long time to accept that there's simply no point in trying to express alternative interpretations of reality to (most) others
it has also taken a long time to accept that i have to do things my way, that my behaviours must conform to my own perceptions of reality rather than the view of reality i have absorbed from my family and society.
you must look within so that you may learn to live without.

tfw economics master race, requiring both quantitative and qualitative MASTERY and FLAIR. we the type of niggas to do some math shit then reference some ancient poem liit no big deal lmao!

Gb2ejmr

The difference is that most people just aren't exposed to very much math. We consume somewhat-complex art (film, television, music, literature, often times even theatre) from a very young age, but we don't do math beyond counting until school starts. That's a 5-7 year gap.

By the time kids are in school, they're more familiar with art than with math, so they gravitate towards it, and develop further in the artistic direction as a result. This is made worse by the fact that there's usually only 1 period of math (or, if you're lucky, 1 period of math and 1 period of science) until you get to middle school, where it's already more or less too late to develop the basic intuition and affinity needed to be good at STEM.

Once high school starts, there are effectively two different classes of student: mathematically literate and mathematically illiterate. The first can easily choose between STEM and liberal arts, because they've had adequate exposure to both. The second are more or less forced into the liberal arts, barring monumental self-directed study.

In my experience, kids who are good at science/math usually like their subject, and usually have at least one parent who introduced them to it before they started school.

Many professors I talk with say that their best students always have a kind of love for the material.

It's not about inherent ability, it's about exposure and developing a passion.

t. double major in comp. sci and literature

I've been a part of publishing several science papers, chiefly authored only one (where i did the bulk of writing and others only revised and advised). I can tell you that I find it much easier than fiction, which I do as a hobby. It's pretty easy to write what happened in science. You spend at minimum several months doing the work, and you know it intimately enough that the writing is easy. Science writing is fairly formulaic and straight forward

I did this top. I got a physics degree, now I spend all my free time studying metaphysics, and think science was a mistake.

All it proved is that I have enough attention span to shuffle around indices, and do some proofs by contradiction. Huge waste of time.

In every group of misfortunate-looking people, there's always one disproportionately hot person, in my observation. Look at pic related. Third from the right is not by herself gorgeous, but sticks out in that group like something that obviously sticks out in a group.

If you've ever studied math you wouldn't have such a silly view of things.

It's like a different language, if you don't know it or only a small amount then looking at a page full of it is humbling because you're clueless. Once you've spent time learning it it makes sense and becomes a lot simpler.

I'm not saying mathematics isn't difficult, but you cannot compare it to fiction in such a way. It's like blindly saying someone has a low IQ like that means anything.

I’m a stockbroker. Quit projecting.

I worked as a research assistant for a professor in the field of law and economics for a couple years. That was some intense stuff. I was in law school at the time, didn't understand nearly everything on the economics side, the equations he came up with, etc. I stuck mainly to providing research on legal issues and editing/proofreading (English was not his first language so he needed a decent amount of help with regards to things like diction).

How do you like the work?

this is so fucking stupid you’re such a fucking faggot, i hate that we taught normal fags all of this you all shit out the grossest versions of the gnosis. please go find a dark patch of woods and let the animals take you you lumpy brained nigger
they do, it does.

t. smarter than 90% of mathematicians and can barely do calc

The only good reply in the whole thread.