Is Humanities harder than STEM?

> STEM which has defined answers?
Most STEM careers require a lot of creative problem solving once you've got the base knowledge drilled into you. Test problems have defined answers; real world problems have solutions nobody's thought of yet.

You clearly didn't learn much.

Assuming he isn't lying, he bothered to get formal education in philosophy. Of course they're not apt to be capable of understanding it.

"If an ass goes traveling, he will not come back a horse."
Likewise, if you educate a moron, you will only get an educated moron. I'm not sure why it must be this way, and why this is how it pans out, but it does.

k

Humanities is only easy if you share the professor's social views

>Humanities requires more creativity and problem solving than X

I took 4000 level writing intensive classes my freshman year, which are required electives for humanties majors. I didn't go to class and the final took me 12 minutes. Got an A.
Meanwhile, physics 1 had a 50% failure/dropout rate

Anyone who thinks humanties are difficult are either lazy or braindead.

There is always a right and wrong.

With humanities you just have to figure out the right and wrong for every permutation of baseless assumptions people can make, when there isnt an obvious one.

Because this is complex to manage in a formal model, we parallelize the problem by having people ignore the existence of assumptions such that everyone has a different set of assumptions, and so we get a wonderful diversity of contradictory opinions for people to pick their favorite from. Arguing about these opinions acts to preserve and incrementally improve upon them, an exemplary application of evolution.

humanities has no value at all. oh boy gee whiz better learn how to use literary devices. lets figure out if this situation which will never occur in real life has severe moral implications!!11! life would be so much easier without humans in gneral

Of course they are, you have to dance around everything to avoid triggering your professor and being expelled for hate speech.

I love this thread. You guys clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Someone who studies the humanities would argue that neither discipline is more difficult than the other. To attempt to put an objective measure on the difficulty of all humanities and social science would be to subject it to scientific thinking.

In other words, to say something like, "Oh one subject is easier in school" is to completely miss the point.

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>the sexist gender
Holy shit, that's gold

> implying one writing class = "All Humanities"

Both require a different sort of intelligence.

At my uni the History, Classical Studies, and Anthropology departments actually have decent standards they expect from students while at one of our sister unis those departments are a fucking joke.

Our Bio, Chem, and Physics departments try their best but it's obvious they didn't put in a lot of effort into teaching anyone below the 400 level.

But thats true. i read Fahrenheit 451 and seriously this is a huge pile of conservative bullshit.
What the fuck is so wrong with c section ? Or with euthanasia ? Or divorce ? Well you can be against whose things but writing a book set in an evil dystopian society where you explicitly mention how those things are common instead of argumenting seem a bit immature

I died reading this. Thx.

It's not that there is no right or wrong, it's just that it's harder to conduct an experiment and get meaningful results, since aspects of psychology and social interactions are related to each other in the same way say chemistry and biology, or chemistry and physics are.

If something isn't right in your chemistry experiment, maybe some quantum mechanic process can explain it, or if something unknown is going on in cells, maybe it's biochem. In that regard almost all the hard sciences are connected in that way.

The nature of what we call psychology and sociology makes it difficult to make a "unified" idea of human nature for example, so most experiments are stand alone.

Because there's no right and wrong it becomes fairly easy, you don't need to bother finding the right answer, you just need to show your reasoning in fancy way

After studying math at university I have respect for philosophy. It was weird to see how much of a persons research is influenced by their underlying worldview.

I think an accurate measure could just be a comparison of the pass and failure rates of the 2 studies. Harder = higher failure rate.

This image.

Never in my life have I ever seen someone miss the point so hard. Thank you for bringing this to me

Humanities is just as rigid in its own way. You have to adhere to certain politically correct expectations, and if you question or go against the grain in any way your professor will fail you on their subjective prerogative.

While there may not be an objective "right" or "wrong" in many humanities subjects, there absolutely will be with individual professors teaching them.

Things like that are canaries in the coal mine. If there is a massive amount of divorces, dysfunctional families, abortions, etc etc. It typically shows that the society is in a bad place. He's ranting about the amount, not the existence alone.
That said, this whole conversation is still missing the point.

Yeah, but C-sections? Even the catholics allow those nowadays

yes

I haven't read the book in a long time but i imagine it's more to do with c-sections becoming the norm rather than a situationally useful procedure. "i'd rather just have a c-section and get it done with than faff about trying to push the thing out."

Some people will find STEM harder, some people will find Humanities harder, some people will find both easy, some people will find both hard.

No, they're different and equally difficult. That being said, it's generally a lot easier to get your bachelor's in humanities compared to STEM.

exept c-section is not the easy way to do it, and even if such a procedure existed, why would it be bad to alleviate the suffering of both the mother and the newborn ?

>exept c-section is not the easy way to do it
It very well could be in the future. Also, it is for the doctors, look at how the likelihood of c-section correlates with a doctor's knock-off time and you'll see that for some unexplained reason a c-section is much more likely to occur towards the end of their shift.
>why would it be bad to alleviate the suffering of both the mother and the newborn ?
You're right, anesthetizing all mothers and giving them a c-section should be the preferable course of action, wouldn't want them to suffer. Also mobility scooters for everyone, this walking around is a lot of unnecessary effort.

I don't believe Humanities are harder than STEM as a subject. However I do believe that a lot of Humanities degrees are considerably easier than obtaining a STEM degree.

For some fucking reason Humanities have become a hugbox of sorts, maybe it's the overabundance of female teaching staff in general, that favor passing people where they should not.

I have a masters degree in English literature and in Computational Linguistics with a heavy focus on Statistics. The subject matter of my English degree wasn't actually any easier, then again - I didn't choose an easy subject or professor to do my thesis. However I have seen people go through without getting anything out of their English degree, mostly by choosing the path of least resistance.

>You're right, anesthetizing all mothers and giving them a c-section should be the preferable course of action, wouldn't want them to suffer. Also mobility scooters for everyone, this walking around is a lot of unnecessary effort.
You are feeding feminists with that kind of responses. Birthing can be actually extremely painful and we consider it almost a requirement to give anesthesia during similarly painful operations and even when working on teeth.

Your comparison is such a bullshit because walking isn't extremely painful for the average man and is actually really good for health and mood.

this 1000x, STEM is harder because we don't grade-inflate and coddle students. I love the humanities though

Humanities isn't one thing. It's a mix of many different things, some more valid than others. Science is one part, which is obviously real and important, for example linguistics, psychology, gender studies, sociology and economics. Other parts are just opinions, like art analysis, which is a completely different thing. There's also history, philosophy and other things that are very different from each other. It's wrong to lump them all together when they are so different in nature.
I prefer to only think about the science parts, though, because that's what's important with real use.

Maybe in real life humanities are a joke. But I think the sciences are very important, and we need more research. My impressions are not good, but doing good science in humanities is very needed. The problem is that people have too much personal investment in the subjects, so they'll always be tempted to fabricate results that allign with their political values. That's not as much of a problem in for example chemistry, very few people have strong political beliefs about how chemistry should work, but it is somewhat of a problem in ecology, with people looking for support for their idea that all diversity is good and all extinction destroys everything. This is just an opinion, but people drag it into the science so there will never be done proper ecological research. The same thing is a big problem in social sciences. But with good people using proper methods, we could get so many good things.
Stuff like physics and biology has accomplished more, but if you really tried you could get really good results in social science too. And in the end, it may end up being more difficult than real science, because it's very complex.