Does anyone else find STEM classes absolutely abhorrent? Humanity classes are actually interesting, and I enjoy going to class; even when some social science class tries injecting """real""" science, I lose interest almost immediately.
Is this just a me problem or do most people feel like this? I honestly don't understand how someone could possibly like number crunching or doing equations all day.
It's just you. Not a single person in the entire world feels the exact same way, you special little snowflake.
Well obviously not, but around the same line of thinking perhaps
you're right about all of STEM that isn't math and pure physics
Those are the worst though -- it manages to be hard and boring. I wouldn't touch them at all if they weren't absolutely required.
Does anyone else find humanities classes absolutely abhorrent? STEM classes are actually interesting, and I enjoy going to class, even when some science class tries injecting """ethics""" or """history""" of the science being taught, i lose interest almost immediately.
Is this just a me problem or do most people feel like this? I honestly don't understand how someone could possibly like writing essays all day, especially when you never can have the satisfaction of getting the "right" answer, cuz there isn't one.
...
well no shit
you are super privileged person if you have a job that you actually enjoy so dont expect getting a job thanks to some meme humanist degree
What's ironic is that as more people get into STEM, that degree becomes increasingly worthless. I know plenty of friends with degrees like CS or X Engineering who can't get a job. It's like a bubble that will burst soon. Perhaps unemployable degrees now will become employable in the future.
I went to study CS because I fell for the web development meme but it's so fucking boring. I have zero motivation to learn some stupid flavor of the month framework or language and coding is boring as shit.
Wish I could get a history degree instead, at least I'll do something that brings me joy
lol jumping through hoops so you'll be employable by the globalist machine that dictates what you have to do with the one life you're given or else starve so it can suck you dry of the resources you provide and toss you with the rest of 'em while it continues raping this planet for the god of consumption
cuck shit
Hence, why capitalism was a mistake. At least in other systems, your work means something.
How far up your own ass do you have to be to think this kind of comment is clever?
Imagine being so absolutely braindead that you cannot enjoy simple rational subjects but love listening to a bunch of other people's opinions and swallowing them without question
>most people go into STEM for money
Is this what humanities-tards actually believe?
Yeah, I totally understand. A traditional CS degree comprises of algorithms, theoretical ideas/discrete math, logic, etc. But honestly how much of that do you actually need to code monkey? It's just like with degrees like literature, where there's a lot of "useless" information, so why do tech degrees get a pass while others don't? Also yeah I agree, coding is fucking annoying and there's nothing "cool" about it except that it's useful.
In addition, you may not even get that comfy code monkey job you wanted, so what was the whole point when you could've just been on welfare reading cool history shit anyways?
I like both
Wow, lucky you. Aren't you fucking special?
He isn't special, but you are
I'm a computer science major and a history minor.
I enjoy history more because it's interesting, comfy and easy but I have an aptitude for maths. logic and computer programming.
I went with a CS degree because the average entry level salary for a graduate from my university's CS program is $55k/yr. My brother graduated 2 years ago from the same school/program and he's already making $70k.
Here's an excerpt from one of the maths homeworks
>Suppose {f_n} is a sequence of monotonic functions of [a, b], and {f_n} converges pointwise to a continuous function f on [a, b]. Prove that the convergence is uniform on [a, b]
Even if I were to show this, all I now know is that some random sequence of functions converges uniformly in a random interval. Who does this benefit? It's literally even more useless than my polysci class.
>Who does this benefit?
Physicists, astronauts, engineers, meteorologists, economists, financiers, marketologists, sociologists etc. The list is pretty long.
It's testing your knowledge of the behavior of functions, sequences and convergence, all of which are useful tools.
That particular question may not have an application, but the tools themselves do.
Right, the tools themselves are useful, but I could literally say the same about any writing 101 class that freshman are forced to take. Or any sort of culture class. Or poetry class. They all teach us certain tools to apply later in life. So by that reasoning, shouldn't all these degrees be equally viable and not just certain STEM ones?
But see the problem is, I could literally say the same thing about any arbitrary subject. I think studying 18th century British nationalism could really benefit modern day government in providing healthcare to a wide variety of people. In that way, a niche topic in the humanities could very well be just as useful as some shit regarding functions and convergence (which basically leads up to calculus, but proven rigourously, so it's even more useless).
>Right, the tools themselves are useful, but I could literally say the same about any writing 101 class that freshman are forced to take. Or any sort of culture class. Or poetry class. They all teach us certain tools to apply later in life. So by that reasoning, shouldn't all these degrees be equally viable and not just certain STEM ones?
No because society doesn't value them equally.
The only writing skills most people/organizations require are business and legal writing.
Okay, so we are in agreement that "my useless skill is better than your useless skill" is completely arbitrary. That means it's also subject to change and it very well be possible that in the near future, liberal arts degrees will get all the jobs because the tech bubble will have burst.
STEMspergery is a cancer on education. Most seem to love it, hence doing it and obsessing with it.
Please do not use the term 'humanities', as it is a Renaissance term which inherently supposes a humanism.
Math and pure physics (both of which, especially the latter though, are very loaded terms) are exactly what OP describes.
You're deluded by an illusion of creative freedom, which you simply do not have.
History isn't a 'humanity', it's a social science. As is ethics as it is now taught, since it is all normative.
>rational
Loaded buzzword.
>swallowing them without question
If you do this at any serious (not factory) university, you will fail terribly.
>Okay, so we are in agreement that "my useless skill is better than your useless skill" is completely arbitrary. That means it's also subject to change and it very well be possible that in the near future, liberal arts degrees will get all the jobs because the tech bubble will have burst.
No, STEM programs teach some useful skills while non-STEM usually teach no useful skills.
A bunch of rapists? No thanks, Mr. Fish.
Wrong actually.
And here we have exhibit A that pure STEM education is harmful because it doesn't teach people how to read.
I'm a history minor; nonetheless you made an equivocation.
Either way, you've clearly still completely ignored the rest of the chain of replies.
Rika u femacuck I'm gonna shit in ur cornflakes
I only responded to The ratio of useless skills to useful skills is far higher in the liberal arts than it is in something like computer engineering.
Useless in what sense though? Who determines that critical reading skills are less important than being able to calculate total capacitance in a circuit in series?
The sum total of other people
Which is exactly my point. Maybe you should take more humanity classes so you can boost your critical thinking skills.
Other people decide it, so relative to you it's objective.
Traps are life
>You're deluded by an illusion of creative freedom, which you simply do not have.
this is true in every other field, you're simply carving into unexplored possibilities whatever you do
...
>it's hard!!
brainlet confirmed
No.
That said, "fans" of STEM fields have to be the most autistic people on earth.
I'm a chemical engineer with a history minor, so here's my take on it. Yes, a lot STEM classes are really boring, but most of them are just building blocks. Its not like history or art where you can start study immediately and find something interesting - you have do a lot of technical classes that give the tools to do the interesting stuff, like process design, optimization, failure analysis etc... That's when you get do something beyond number crunching, and I think that's why a lot of people go into STEM.
History doesn't teach reading, it teaches scanning.
When somebody uses 'liberal arts' to describe a field, rather than a type of education, that is when we know this person is an absolute idiot.
Computer science actually works best at liberal arts institutions. Liberal arts are a pedagogy that demands that students study from a wide number, rather than their field and what is vaguely related for the sake of utility (a physics major taking chemistry classes).
This is undeniably more useful because it applies to any degree whatsoever but also demands they do more.
That's not what 'objective' means.
>when a STEMsperg tries creative writing
What is beyond the crunching is more crunching. I say this as somebody who worked in chemical engineering, and later 'data science', as they insisted on calling it because I wasn't 'working well with others', as they insisted.
One does not enter 'art' with a full set of skills, you fool. One develops them while exploring interests. One specializes accordingly. Nobody cares if you're a fucking history minor, you're probably 19. What, you've taken a few generic world history courses? Fuck you, kid.
>I say this as somebody who worked in chemical engineering, and later 'data science', as they insisted on calling it because I wasn't 'working well with others', as they insisted.
It sounds like you denigrating fields you don't understand because they make you feel dumb, and that you have shitty personality to boot.
>Fuck you, kid.
Fuck you too.
>That's not what 'objective' means.
ob·jec·tive
əbˈjektiv/
adjective
1.
Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
You have no influence over how other people value it, therefore relative to you, there are skills that are objectively less valuable than others.
You don't get to decide whether creative writing is more or less valuable than business writing, it just is.
I hail from Discord to be gay on this server
I sort of agree. Hard sciences can be interesting (like chemistry and biology), but learning how to solve for x or find the displacement of a car isn't engaging. Social science fields have so much room for eye-opening debate and discussion, while 2 + 2 will always equal 4.
henry fuck you
"""math"""
baka you study wikipedia
>don't understand
>shitty personality
Project harder child, I went through all of your disgusting education as a fucking double major and worked in the field for longer than you've had hair on your balls.
I didn't 'work well with others' because I refused to work with a bunch of functionally teenage girls with no safety standards, who only worked there through actual affirmative action (in Canada the field is generally expected to have a 50/50 gender split, but the split is not near 50/50 for graduates: guess what happens! and they had family that worked higher up)
Facts don't exist.
Thus objective cannot exist.
The dictionary definition is totally irrelevant.
>You have no influence over how other people value it, therefore relative to you, there are skills that are objectively less valuable than others.
That's not how that works.
This is what happen when a brainlet STEMsperg tries to argue semantics.
>Facts don't exist
I know for a fact that you're a brainlet
>triggered brainlet
m-m-m-muh fax
WITHOUT FAX SHITSKINS AND MOOSLIMS WILL TAKE OVER EVROPE AND DESTORY MUH WHITE CIVILIZASHUN
>cognitive_dissonance.txt
FUCKIN FEMINISTS AND SJWS ARE DESTROYING WHITE CIVLIZASHUN
ONLY Veeky ForumsTERRY GAYMES CAN SAVE IT
DEPORT ALL MEXICANS, TAKE ALL CHILDREN OUT OF SCHOOL, PUT THEM IN FRONT OF A LAPTOP (MADE BY WHITES!) AND MAKE THEM WATCH GLORIOVS ROME MASSACRE THEIR ACTUAL ANCESTORS
WIR WAREN KAENIGEN N' SHIZZZ
>t. brainlet