Do you respect non STEM majors? Why or why not?

Yes. Anyone can make tons of money with any major they want. I might even respect them more if they make money because they aren't as intellectually stimulated as I am.

Who is Russell

Who is Godel

Who is Tarski

Who is Aristotle

Who is Kripke

Who is Peirce

I think you go to a meme college or you are lying. If you had taken any elementary course in set theory, or even basic algebra, or even high school probability, you would've learned about first order logic.

For me it really depends on the person. Unlike, many in STEM I'm not inherently against the idea of liberal arts majors. I'm even okay with the concept of gender studies. That said in practice the liberal arts often tend towards mai feelsies rather than actual study and discussion and many professors would rather talk about themselves and their pet theories about than promote discussion.

>Russel, Godel, Tarski, Aristotle
Mathematicians.

>Peirce
Scientist (also known as mathematician light)

>Kripke
Crank metaphysicist. I would not even dare smoking whatever he is rolling.

I have learned about first order logic. Even outside of school I read an entire book about it last summer and I plan on taking another advanced course in mathematical logic offered to seniors when I get there.

But first order logic = mathematics invented by mathematicians.

Heres an example.

Attempts have been made and are currently being made to reconcile quantum mechanics with systems of logic. Both mathematicians and philosophers are researching this problem. Give the late Putnam's "Is Logic Empirical?" a read. It is arguably as insightful as von Neumann's "The Logic of Quantum Mechanics"

>Both mathematicians and philosophers are researching this problem.

So it is the work of mathematicians. Good to know.

>inb4 but what about the philosophers

This would not be the first time outright crazy people study something along with mathematicians. Remember pi=3.2?

Russell is also a philosopher. Almost every academic considers him a philosopher primarily. Except you.

He is a mathematician.

I mean, a lot of mathematicians from time to time like to indulge in academic shitposting and hardcore smoking but that doesn't mean now they are all smokers and philosophers. Academic shitposting is a sidejob, which unfortunately some people call philosophy.

>Mathematicians
You can't call any logician a mathematician. Those men were trained in philosophy

>Scientist
I see you skimmed the front page of his wikipedia page. Peirce was not known for being a scientist. He was known for being a philosopher.

>Crank metaphysicist. I would not even dare smoking whatever he is rolling.

I guess you're gonna a big chunk of modal logic just because the guy creating it was a philosopher huh?

You should go to engineering. I think that's more your speed.

Isn't modal logic that thing used to "prove" god exists?

Oh man. That is a prime example of academic shitposting from my main man Godel. No better way of telling the philosophers that they are a bunch of weed smoking cranks than using their theory to prove unicorns exist or some bullshit. Topkek.

Anyways, I may miss modal logic but nothing of value was lost.

>It's a "Veeky Forums doesn't realize majors exist between STEM and gender studies and similar garbage" episode

So you're gonna discredit someone's work just because they did something crazy with it?

So many mathematicians tried using their knowledge to try to prove the existence of God or create math from their religion, most notably Georg Cantor. That doesn't discredit their work.

It isn't a surprise that someone like you would be bad at reasoning and logic. I wish you luck on your next code monkey job.

Nice fedora tipping by the way.

>I am good at math
You're an undergrad shitter who went through you first or second analysis class, correct?

>Non-STEM
>"People"

You are the reason we will never have space travel.

This is what redditors/stemlords actually believe

>>Kripke
>Crank metaphysicist.
>Isn't modal logic that thing used to "prove" god exists?

plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-provability/

Someone post that study showing that Philosophy majors have the highest average IQs and GRE scores, moreso than Math majors

Always gets STEMcucks assmad

Yes
A. I have met many very smart philosophy, lingustics or literature students (even though I've also met my share of those who couldn't into basic logic). If you are interested in logic, semantics or formal linguistics, there is a lot of insight to be gained by discussing it with linguists.
B. My gf is an artist and aesthetics grad student

Phil students are easily smarter than engineers, comp sci, and physics students

I studied math and computer science but I also took a bunch of philosophy. They play well together. Proof writing, algorithm design, and philosophical reasoning are all pretty similar desu. I just can't do anything useful with philosophy (except maybe pull out philosophy knowledge as a fun party trick)

this. math still reigns supreme (so to speak), but that doesn't mean non-stem fields aren't useful in some way.

what we should consider is eliminating financial aid to some of the social sciences like womens studies. govt should not be funding political activists

I take philosophy, history, and economics seriously. I don't take "literary theory" (lel) and ethnic studies seriously.

>I studied math and computer science but I also took a bunch of philosophy
Wish I had done this.

I think there was a list of different Majors in relation to IQ and if I remember correctly Physics students and Philosophy students were both in the same range at the top of the totem pole. I could be wrong about that though.

I can see a lot of problems with a study like that. I'd like to see where they got their data and the sample size. Such a conclusion wouldn't surprise me but there is so much variation between schools regarding what the talented students try to major in. There is probably variation by state and country too.

they're all shit though

Why would you need us to post a scientific study?

Why don't you use argumentation and rhetoric to show us that in a certain framework of thought, philosophy majors have higher IQs?

this, pretty much, for anything non-science with few exceptions

>be me, spanish
>studying in UK
>very popular course at my uni is modern languages
>fourth (4th) year student of Spanish/French asks me to correct her 300 word essay (note you need previous studies in languages at high school to be able to study this)
>literally primary school tier grammar
>can't speak fluidly in any of the languages she studies
>she is on a high 2:1-First (in 3.5-4 gpa tier for burgers)

Her degree is going to be just as employable as my pure math degree, kms

also inb4 she was trying to fuck you, i know she is, but she is an ugly fatty

...

I respect them as a hobby, not as a academic endeavor. Employers don't though, they see someone with a first in History above someone with a 2.2 in Mathematics.

Neck yourself

>actually thinking the visual arts department of a state school would on average produce comparable work/peers to private art school.

It's the equivalent of thinking your average state school with a science and engineering department would be comparable to something akin to Caltech and MIT.

There's a difference between arrogance and ignorance. Clearly op's post suffers from the later.

As far as respect is concerned any major outside shit like women studies or equivalent is worthy of respect.

And while social sciences might be pushing (low reproducibility in work) I still respect the attempt to critically perform analysis on a social collective.

>scientific and technological innovation
Are significant in cultural development, you think the tech that the world runs on and the science it derives from, has had no cultural impact?

Random works of art are not culture. They relate to cultural development if they have an impact on it - which almost none do, shitty action films have more of an impact. That's not to say "random works of art" are the entirety of non-STEM, but to claim some extremely classical idea of set fields, like playing certain instruments in a certain style and painting in a specific style, being the foundation and main factor of cultural development, is absolutely retarded. That's the obviously-narrow and conflated point of view, of long-dead aristocrats who think anything beyond their isolated academic structures and what is currently fashionable within them - is not culture - which is obviously false.

All of it is Philosophy. But you can distinguish the sections of retarded work of "philosophers" and the encompassing action of it in general.

Modern logic was developed by people closer to Mathematicians than to the so-called "philosophers" and their retarded "work", which are the main source of derision directed at Philosophy.

The majority of "philosophers" who were making baseless claims and corresponding academic autism are far removed from those who developed Symbolic and Mathematical logic (and much of formal logic).

Really we need more words to break fields up.

I get what you're saying, but if you're going to criticize philosophy, you should criticize specific philosophies or works by specific philosophers, not the entire field of philosophy.

Like it or not, science can't answer every question. Questions such as how our political system should work or is this action ethical or not.

Also it's incredibly ignorant to call all work of philosophy "retarded work". It's because of philosophy that we have a working democracy.

Philosophy and other humanities enrich human culture, and if you just dismiss it without any though then I think reddit would be a better plae for you.

Today, I read 34 pages of ethics reading with one page of useful into.
The moral of this story is philosophers aren't human and I'm going to be unethical out of spite for them wasting my time.

I don't respect people based on their major. I respect them based on how they approach life, how hard they work, if they believe in the importance of what they do and are well-meaning individuals who are driven by reason.

I'll take an Actual Gender Studies Major who works their ass off to understand what they're doing and find intelligent ways to apply their learning to better society, over just another "Pre-med" who complains about Orgo being too hard and questions why they even need to take a math class, and just wants to be rich already.

Non-stem person here, and while I don't have the propensity to learn math and all that
>science
stuff at least I won't waste my life ruining my back looking at numbers like some type of autistic monkey. Try getting some warmth and fulfillment in your life, Bateman-ass nigga.

I despise anything and anyone that doesn't gives me immediate pleasure or joy
Only people that I can give any form of respect are those who act like they absolutely own everything and are willing to step over people for their own good.

>retardation

I could understand hesitating to classify Godel or Tarski as primarily philosophers (though they did philosophical work), but Russell, Aristotle, and Peirce were primarily philosophers by trade, and their work in other fields were often motivated by philosophical problems. You have no idea what you're talking about.

well of course.
Life is dominated by math and science, hell that is what our whole existence is made of. Nothing is without these two, the marriage of existence and understanding.

But think about it, what would we be if it wasn't for the arts? Just machines made of flesh making equations without a purpose but to have them. Sure the arts may not be the most essential thing to humanity right now, but they are what drives our human spirit. The beauty we find even within sequences of equations. Everything in our existence is done in math, but we see the grand masterpiece that is the universe. We chose to try to understand it, not just to be able to work with it, but for the beauty in it, even the most terrifying inventions ever made capture the eye of the masses. Look at the atom bomb, a shell encasing materials that were used to flatten two cities, yet we found Beauty, Application, and Fear in the creation.

>You can't call any logician a mathematician. Those men were trained in philosophy

cringe

>shaming people into stem

No

Stop this

I don't want to compete with MORE people.

I respected everyone who is not a biologist.
t. chemist

What is discrete maths

I do as long as they're not complete SJW's

Sure. Social sciences and philosophy, while mostly training you to frame ambiguous subject matter with interchangeable terminology to defend unfalsifiable pretense, verses you in the history of thought on a subject and provides useful insights as long as you don't claim some special methods of understanding and interpreting reality because then you're just a bullshitter.

Arts and literatures inspire and also verse you in the history of ideas. Again, as long as you aren't claiming some special methods of understanding life, then you're just versing yourself in the symbolism and themes of past thinkers and packaging them for newer audiences. There's nothing wrong with this.

Linguistics is harder than maths. Math is the language of the universe, and learning it is learning one language with very rational rules, but linguists have to learn three or four languages with irrational and unfixed vocabularies and grammars and learn to switch back and forth between them. It's honestly amazing and if the world's linguists and translators could get together some kind of worldwide literacy program and mend our collective communicational barriers, they just might save the world.

All of these things are respectable, but none have any hope of modeling and understanding the physical world and none have the predictive power the hard science does.

Why are you even on this board if you don't like math? You came here to insult us because of our majors?

Some people's hobbies are science and math and we do get """warmth and fulfillment""" when we study them. Not everyone has to be some bullshit african american literature major to enjoy life.

If every non-stem major is like you, who thinks that people here waste their life just because they enjoy math, then non-stems are literally retarded.

Lol fuck no, and who should? The days of contributing to humanity without a STEM degree are long over. Anybody who feels they should get respect for their non-STEM work is an entitled nobody.

You can argue capitalism rewards everybody as it should, but innovation like a drug that saves your life is priceless and unrepayable. Waiters, real estate agents, lawyers, politicians, salesmen, etc don't deserve the same respect. It's not even close.

>elementary school teachers forcing children to learn math and reading against their will
>Cops who go headlong into bad neighborhoods announcing themselves as the enemy of the people who want your privileges
>Soldiers defending your right to be such a spoiled arrogant little shit
>Translators negotiating between nations and corporate empires, giving carl sagan to the middle easterners who are scared of ideas
>Educational psychologists studying how best to force mathematics and literacy upon five year olds
>People who work 70 hours a week doing jobs you don't want to do, just to feed their family so that maybe they could have a shot at the opportunities you've had.

These things don't deserve as much respect as some 17 year old little shit who's never been anywhere, never done anything, never met anyone, and doesn't have shit to say worth listening to, but was good at math?

Of course I respect them. If I didn't respect them, that would be suggesting humanities, literature, art, (most important) do not have relevance in our society and the human condition, and it does.

What I do not respect about non-stem majors is that they are trying to group themselves in in with disciplines that garner more respect than them.

1. I'm a tutor, and never said anything about teachers. Teaching is not innovative, however.
2. Never said anything about cops. A lot of cops are screwy and they have their own benefits. Policing is not innovative.
3. Modern soldiers are immoral. Science has stopped major wars.
4. Translators are not innovators.
5. Again, teaching is not innovative. There's nothing new to teaching people, and it's not hard.
6. I've worked those jobs and those people are lucky they have jobs.

The math student is on his way to making waves. The same non-argument could be used against any of the aforementioned careers when they're in training.

Also, to add, when you innovate you give something to humanity that in all practicality cannot be taken back. Other professions do not have the same effect.

I remember when I was an ignorant 16 y/o too

Did I upset you somehow, brainlet?

Ignore this dipshit teen-troll.

Other professions are necessary for a functional society, there would be no "innovators" (don't know why you use that gay word) without them.

I imagine you're overdue for an ass beating.

Get off Veeky Forums and go fuck yourself. You're the reason why the trolls that come here to say that science is a religion have any basis.

I want you to go live in a society with only stem people. That society will have literally no culture, and the only thing people could do is autistically jerk off to meaningless equations.

You wouldn't even know how quickly that society would fall apart. There would be no political structure. If you were convicted of a crime you would have no way to defend yourself, since there wouldn't be any lawyers.

Now go back to where you came from >>>/reddit/

>Please respect my shitty profession even though I have no idea what an integral is and what scientists actually put into work
There are no books on what doesn't work in engineering or science. There's probably a police officer for dummies though. It's just a job.
>That society will have literally no culture
>What are hobbies?

>You wouldn't even know how quickly that society would fall apart.
We wouldn't need those professions if those people weren't there. Their existence requires their jobs. It's a zero sum.

>You're the reason why the trolls that come here to say that science is a religion have any basis.
Also, applied correctly, it is a religion. That's not a bad thing.

>Teaching student STEM subjects to train new scientists and engineers is pointless because its not innovative

Lol never said it was pointless. Why would I get paid otherwise. It's not relatively respectful though, since it's easy. And I garner that attitude from people already, so I don't understand the shock.

Also most of the teachers suck, which is why I'm tutoring them.

>We wouldn't need those professions if those people weren't there

Sounds pretty pointless

Kind of. I'm a biologist, but I don't respect biologists who don't have a basic understanding of math. I hate the state that the life sciences in general are in.

Like, I remember learning about population growth my freshman or sophomore year and when my professor mentioned simple shit like basic fucking logarithm rules and you could see the stares of pure confusion. It was like watching a man walking in the tampon section of Wal-Mart for the first time.

These fucking retards couldn't tell you even HOW to solve a logarithm. No, really. They literally had no idea.

I think it's more to do with our public school system (US here), but the fact that these fucks can get into a university with that level of "proficiency" in math is a joke.

If everyone knew STEM they would teach their own kids.

>Everyone teaches their children STEM
>Sucks if your parents don't have time to give you a proper education
>Sucks if they don't know the area you are interested in
>Why dont we employ this other guy to teach it to them

Also, do politicians count as STEM? Running a country seems important (before someone mentions technocracy)

>What are hobbies?
So you acknowledge that non-STEM people such as artists are important? If a person does art as a hobby, he is an artist.

I think you mean studying art is pointless. I hope you realize how degenerate art would be If people only did it as a hobby, without standing on the shoulders of previous artists. The art a hobbyist who never studied art would create would be akin to the doodles a six year old could make.

>We wouldn't need those professions if those people weren't there. Their existence requires their jobs. It's a zero sum.

How are you this fucking retarded? Does the existence of a politician necessitate the existence of the politician? Go live in an anarchic society and see how that pans out.

Here's something that might be hard for you to understand, but laws are not perfect. There will always be some way to interpret the law that warrants different punishment.

Quit feeding that dipshit.

I don't see why not. Of course every field will have their leaches who don't contribute anything to anyone but you're a special kind of stupid or have been so shelter if you think your field is the only important one worth respect. Arts, construction, invention, culinary, architecture, social fields, even just a woodworker in Japan could be more skilled and dedicated in their area of expertise then you. Like I said you'd be diluted to think a craftsmen who is an expert at his craft does not deserve more respect then some idiot grad student or even some professor of math.

Holy shit pedantic autism. Excuse me, let me elaborate. We would need them less. So much that it would in no way be much of a career, because you wouldn't need as many. Akin to an elected king. No one says they're going to be a king when they grow up.

And this is about respect, not importance. You can be important and replaceable. You can be important and not innovate. You can be important and not advance society.

>Sucks if they don't know the area you are interested in

If you're tutoring someone higher than high school math and science, you're STEM, bud. Also, parents have an obligation to their kids to teach them what they know. Anyone who doesn't make time for that is a scumbag. STEM majors don't need to work 70 hours a week to get by; they have no excuse.

>So you acknowledge that non-STEM people such as artists are important? If a person does art as a hobby, he is an artist.
It is not respectful.

You seem to be confusing giving someone respect as holding them in high esteem. Respecting someone's trade is just recognizing it as a valid contribution.

ex: When someone holds a door for you, you say "thanks"
That's respect.
Not "Why didn't you just design an automatic door?"

Yeah I do.

As tempting as it is to rail on them, we owe a lot of our world to business, marketing, and arts (filmography, music, etc) people.
I got interested in science from watching TV shows as a kid. I wouldn't have seen them if it weren't for the business people funding the show and the animators and musicians who helped make them look interesting enough for them to invest in it in the first place.

I do not have respect for non-STEM people who do not have respect for STEM people though.

Only English. Everyone in my classes who isn't a stem or english major is dumb as fuck.

>And this is about respect, not importance.
Are you regressing? You seem to indicate importance here
>It is not respectful.

So an artist that dedicates his life, blood, sweat, and tears, to his artwork doesn't deserve respect?

Imagine this scenario. You go with your friends (you probably won't have friends but just imagine this) to see a performance by a well known orchestra. Once they are done performing you refuse to clap because you simply don't respect artists. All of your friends would think that you're an asshole for not clapping.

You can respect who you want, but this is a warning that you would probably die alone if you refuse to respect someone just because they aren't in STEM.

Fair enough.

>Respecting someone's trade is just recognizing it as a valid contribution.
It's a contribution, but it's not one to hem and haw about. And anyone who'd label STEM majors as nerds or geeks out of inferiority or ignorance doesn't deserve respect. Not that all non-STEM do that.

I think you're confusing politeness with respect. I'll say my please and thank yous like a decent person should, but I will laugh if they think they deserve any worship or high esteem over some STEM major.

>Are you regressing? You seem to indicate importance here
No, I'm not. A cog in a machine is important, but it's just a normal cog.

>Once they are done performing you refuse to clap because you simply don't respect artists.
I'd clap because I'm polite and appreciate their performance. He shouldn't expect respect more than a STEM major though.

This.
/thread for all you dumb privilleged elitist little reptiles who put all non-physics interests beneath you.

>never seen hardship before: the post.
Calm down, kiddo. The rest of the world didn't get as much handed to them as you did. An african immigrant who escaped warlords to come here and get an AA in psychology to work for the state deserves a lot more respect than your dumb 17 year old ass sitting at a computer ranking who does and doesn't deserve respect.

History is a good one

It depends. Something like classical studies or english gets more respect from me than sociology or even psych

Or, you know, I've seen harship all my life and fixed it with science that no non-STEM brainlet could ever help me with.

That African should stay the fuck in Africa and fix the problem that is Africa. Don't run away to leech off of white people's contributions to the world. In a case such as that, I'd respect him more if he became a soldier to overthrow the warlord.

>A cog in a machine is important, but it's just a normal cog

So a writer who writes an influential book is just a cog? Then why aren't code monkeys and mediocre engineers considered cogs?

>He shouldn't expect respect more than a STEM major though.

Why not? Why shouldn't he expect more respect than a code monkey or a STEM person who just crunches numbers all day?

There are very few artists who make the generalization that art is better than stem, but you stemlords who make the generalization that stem is better than art are fucking everywhere. There is no way to objectively measure whether artsfolk or stemfolk are better, and its pointless to do so.

Neither a stem degree nor an arts degree alone warrant respect. It's about the significant contributions either one makes.

>Then why aren't code monkeys and mediocre engineers considered cogs?
Because they're helping innovate. There is nothing new under the sun with art.

The arts are the only things worth studying. All else is hard labour - man is meant to enjoy the flairs of living, not to seek to understand what physically makes them.

We DESPERATELY need more women studies, African-American Studies, Tribal music appreciation majors!

>There is nothing new under the sun with art.
Are you serious? Do you know anything about art, or is your entire knowledge of it just listening to pop music? Look up any wikipedia page about art history or art movements or paintings.

Also designing a web page, which is what most mediocre stem grads do, is not innovation.

>Also designing a web page, which is what most mediocre stem grads do, is not innovation.
Meh dude, if the only information I had was one guy was a STEM grad and the other was an artist, I'd respect the STEM major more. The STEM major has more potential, regardless of whether he's doing anything with it.

Art movements were similar to discoveries in science. They really only came about because we started sharing information (paper, cheap printing). I'm still waiting on a good IDM/breakcore/rock crossover, but I think there is not much left in "innovation" with art.