What's with humanities majors?!!

[Trytostaydead]

Prideful arrogant little beasts they are (no offense to you humanities majors out there). I just go through arguing with an International-Relations major about current events and she went off angry as hell.

It seems to be a common misconception that because you're a science major you have no idea what happens around you, or current events and they think they can roughshod over you with some "IR" terminology or their propoganda bullshit. But as soon as you show that you DO know about current events, history, or politics they get beligirent. Then they try talking about how one of their professors got invited to mediate some "secret" conference (if it's so secret why are they telling their students about it you dip-dunk) and go, "see? I have SOURCES!" Yeah, good for you.. wanna hear my sources? And I quickly shut them up.. then they call you an asshole and stop talking to you.

Oh, and let's not get started on those "intellects" you hear at Starbucks (okay, I like their caramel.. sue me!) or in the library trying to impress a girl. Funny shit.

[weemadando]

Being a humanities major I wil now say that you are wrong.

Having said that...

A lot of the people doing these courses are morons, who are doing it because they couldn't get into anything else or are so stupid as to not be able to comprehend anything else.

I was offered Maritime Engineering/Architecture, but chose to start a double degree (arts & science). After determining that Geology and Computing, though interesting hobbies are shit courses, continued on doing arts.

Now, I've spent the past 3 years studying Political Science, History and Ancient Civilisations, so in those debates I can often claim the intellectual high ground, just like an engineer would if we were talking about structural tolerances or similar.

I spend hours on end in classes smacking morons about verbally, and in a recent class very nearly physically attacked someone who suggested that we abandon our troops in Iraq. Had they not backed down after my first verbal barrage/been male I would definately have beaten the shit out of them.

Anyhow, humanities students can be arrogant, but we do tend to be better informed on some issues, if you have a problem accepting that, then well, its your problem.

[Zoink]

Yup had similar experiences. My friend is in ethics, his father is a doctor, and his goal I think is to be a perpetual student... lucky smuck. A night with his classmates is really fun: they "collect" experiences so that they can throw it into normal conversation.

He just came back from Rwanda. So although its interesting to have a conversion on the problems with what happened/happening in Rwanda... he also uses it as a "chick pick-up" line. "So hi how are you.... just came back from Rwanada myself... what's your opinion of the situation there"... works with his classmates but he gets blank stares from everybody else. The funny thing is that his friends are the same way. I was talking to one girl, and the second thing she said was that she's from Croatia, and how back in their civil war she used to carry dead bodies off the front lines... try to spin that conversation

[Darth Wong]

Anyhow, humanities students can be arrogant, but we do tend to be better informed on some issues, if you have a problem accepting that, then well, its your problem.

Upon what data do you base your assertion that humanities students are better-informed about the issues in question than other kinds of students? I would be very interested in the studies supporting your generalization, particularly as they relate to the pitiful entrance requirements for humanities courses and the obvious implications for mean academic achievement and general competence levels.

[weemadando]

Anyhow, humanities students can be arrogant, but we do tend to be better informed on some issues, if you have a problem accepting that, then well, its your problem.

Upon what data do you base your assertion that humanities students are better-informed about the issues in question than other kinds of students? I would be very interested in the studies supporting your generalization, particularly as they relate to the pitiful entrance requirements for humanities courses and the obvious implications for mean academic achievement and general competence levels.

The same reasons that engineers claim claim to be better informed on some issues.

Its called an education. Sure, you can watch the news and read books, but that can only take you so far. The classes are designed to expand upon that and to promote debate in thought etc.

If you want to carry on your campaign against humanities majors go right ahead, but it is pissing me off that you think that just because you can crunch numbers you are somehow superior.

[Dalton]

TV students don't bother. We're generally too busy unfucking each other's problems to deal with anyone outside of the school

[The Duchess of Zeon]

You would have been correct once, WMA - once - but sadly, Mike is correct now. The rise of postmodern theory in colleges has totally destroyed the Liberal Arts. Though highly useful, and I would argue, vital to the creation of citizens of a democratic republic, the Liberal Arts stumble in that, naturally not being as firmly grounded as the sciences - they cannot be - they're open to corruption by pernicious theories, as they have been in recent decades.

[Darth Fanboy]

Crunching numbers is an applicable skill though, humanities requirements is what is causing the spawn of horrible liberal picks to popup on college campuses all over.

[RedImperator]

Frankly, there's a significant minority of humanities students who aren't well informed about...well, anything. They spend their academic careers absorbing pop-liberal tripe where facts aren't as important as feelings. I'm sure Ando is as familiar with them as I am, and would probably agree that the humanities would be better off if they, and the professors who espouse that touchy-feely nonsense, be tossed uncerimoniously out into the real world. It would immensely raise the value of the degrees of those of us who feel objective facts must take precedence over theory. Wong's post absolutely infuriated me because he basically said my degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on, but I'm not going to argue with him because he's got a fucking point. The humanities badly need the stables to be mucked out.

[Darth Wong]

Upon what data do you base your assertion that humanities students are better-informed about the issues in question than other kinds of students? I would be very interested in the studies supporting your generalization, particularly as they relate to the pitiful entrance requirements for humanities courses and the obvious implications for mean academic achievement and general competence levels.

The same reasons that engineers claim claim to be better informed on some issues.

When I need information about Renaissance-era literature, I know to ask a literature major. That does not mean a literature major is automatically well-versed in all forms of current events and methods of analyzing evidence in said debates for validity, as most of them seem to think.

Its called an education. Sure, you can watch the news and read books, but that can only take you so far. The classes are designed to expand upon that and to promote debate in thought etc.

As Marina pointed out, that is the intent. Not necessarily the reality.

If you want to carry on your campaign against humanities majors go right ahead, but it is pissing me off that you think that just because you can crunch numbers you are somehow superior.

Strawman. I specifically mentioned the pitiful entrance requirements earlier as my justification, not "just because I can crunch numbers". Moreover, the importance of objectivity and the necessity of rational methods are both stressed in engineering far more than they are in the humanities. The differences run much deeper than the ability to crunch numbers, which is just one of many tools the engineer needs in order to make sure people like you don't die a screaming death when you take the elevator.

[weemadando]

You would have been correct once, WMA - once - but sadly, Mike is correct now. The rise of postmodern theory in colleges has totally destroyed the Liberal Arts. Though highly useful, and I would argue, vital to the creation of citizens of a democratic republic, the Liberal Arts stumble in that, naturally not being as firmly grounded as the sciences - they cannot be - they're open to corruption by pernicious theories, as they have been in recent decades.

American colleges have jumped on the Post-Modern bandwagon. Australian uni's haven't. At least not yet.

Just like how Freud is such a massive part of psychology at colleges in the US, but in Aus he gets two lectures if he's lucky.

Its a different curriculum, teaching style and teaching ethic.

[RedImperator]

You would have been correct once, WMA - once - but sadly, Mike is correct now. The rise of postmodern theory in colleges has totally destroyed the Liberal Arts. Though highly useful, and I would argue, vital to the creation of citizens of a democratic republic, the Liberal Arts stumble in that, naturally not being as firmly grounded as the sciences - they cannot be - they're open to corruption by pernicious theories, as they have been in recent decades.

American colleges have jumped on the Post-Modern bandwagon. Australian uni's haven't. At least not yet.

Just like how Freud is such a massive part of psychology at colleges in the US, but in Aus he gets two lectures if he's lucky.

Its a different curriculum, teaching style and teaching ethic.

Keep them off that bandwagon, with pitchforks and white phosphorus if necessary. Postmodernism is the worst thing that's ever happened to the academy. Thank the nonexistant diety of your choice that it hasn't spread to the sciences or engineering. It would be Star Trek engineering brought to life.

[Trytostaydead]

You would have been correct once, WMA - once - but sadly, Mike is correct now. The rise of postmodern theory in colleges has totally destroyed the Liberal Arts. Though highly useful, and I would argue, vital to the creation of citizens of a democratic republic, the Liberal Arts stumble in that, naturally not being as firmly grounded as the sciences - they cannot be - they're open to corruption by pernicious theories, as they have been in recent decades.

American colleges have jumped on the Post-Modern bandwagon. Australian uni's haven't. At least not yet.

Just like how Freud is such a massive part of psychology at colleges in the US, but in Aus he gets two lectures if he's lucky.

Its a different curriculum, teaching style and teaching ethic.

Keep them off that bandwagon, with pitchforks and white phosphorus if necessary. Postmodernism is the worst thing that's ever happened to the academy. Thank the nonexistant diety of your choice that it hasn't spread to the sciences or engineering. It would be Star Trek engineering brought to life.

Now, I'm not sure about Freud. The few psychology classes I've taken mainly deal with neuroanatomy than anything. But the neurologists, neurosurgeons, and psychiatrists I've talked to say Freud was a sick little bastard but he's right for the most part. Thinking on the neurochemistry though, it does lead credence about impressions and rewards for particular behaviors.

[J]

As someone who studied in the Humanities field (Public Policy) I have to say that unless you have good profs you're not going to be better versed in current events and issues than anyone else. The thing is some (or many) of us start thinking that because we've learned all this stuff about history and political theories it makes us more knowledgeable in the current events field, which isn't quite true. The problem is we actually spend more time arguing semantics and context than anything else and lose sight of things, and common sense in the process. Yes, a lot of us can find relevant Marx and Machiavelli quotes for any event going on, but unfortunately that doesn't show any understanding for things. Unfortunately all this "new-wave" way of things is screwing over things and giving us inflated egos and a bad name in the eyes of others.

[weemadando]

Strawman. I specifically mentioned the pitiful entrance requirements earlier as my justification, not "just because I can crunch numbers". Moreover, the importance of objectivity and the necessity of rational methods are both stressed in engineering far more than they are in the humanities. The differences run much deeper than the ability to crunch numbers, which is just one of many tools the engineer needs in order to make sure people like you don't die a screaming death when you take the elevator.

Like I've said, I was offered a spot in Maritime Architecture, but chose not to do it a) because it would have meant living at home for another 4 years and b) because I decided that I didn't want to do it.

There are differences, but unfortunately some would seem to think that there is nothing in humanities that you can't learn from reading a book. Which, though kind of true is the same for engineering. You can read and read and read about it, but you won't truly understand it without the educational experience.

[Darth Wong]

Like I've said, I was offered a spot in Maritime Architecture, but chose not to do it a) because it would have meant living at home for another 4 years and b) because I decided that I didn't want to do it.

Of course, I agree that pitiful entrance requirements don't necessarily mean that every single student is in there because he had no choice, but at the same time, you must admit that it pollutes the student body with morons.

There are differences, but unfortunately some would seem to think that there is nothing in humanities that you can't learn from reading a book. Which, though kind of true is the same for engineering. You can read and read and read about it, but you won't truly understand it without the educational experience.

There's a key difference: in an engineering faculty, if you AREN'T getting it, they flunk you. Mercilessly, without warning, and without reprieve. That's why two thirds of the incoming class is already gone by the end of the first year. In most humanities faculties, you virtually have to punch the professor in the face to get flunked out, and even then, you'd probably get a second chance.

[RedImperator]

There's a key difference: in an engineering faculty, if you AREN'T getting it, they flunk you. Mercilessly, without warning, and without reprieve. That's why two thirds of the incoming class is already gone by the end of the first year. In most humanities faculties, you virtually have to punch the professor in the face to get flunked out, and even then, you'd probably get a second chance.

Where is this happening? Here, if your GPA falls below 2.0, they throw your sorry ass on academic probation, and if you don't clean up your act in one semester, it's back to community college for you.

[Trytostaydead]

There's a key difference: in an engineering faculty, if you AREN'T getting it, they flunk you. Mercilessly, without warning, and without reprieve. That's why two thirds of the incoming class is already gone by the end of the first year. In most humanities faculties, you virtually have to punch the professor in the face to get flunked out, and even then, you'd probably get a second chance.

HAHAHA! In one of my labs I was joking around and said, "A fast way to flunk this class is by doing this.." and I made slamming motions towards the brain slices and the TA was like "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!!"

[Trytostaydead]

There's a key difference: in an engineering faculty, if you AREN'T getting it, they flunk you. Mercilessly, without warning, and without reprieve. That's why two thirds of the incoming class is already gone by the end of the first year. In most humanities faculties, you virtually have to punch the professor in the face to get flunked out, and even then, you'd probably get a second chance.

Where is this happening? Here, if your GPA falls below 2.0, they throw your sorry ass on academic probation, and if you don't clean up your act in one semester, it's back to community college for you.

Science classes LIKE flunking students. The TAs and profs had a bitch of a time when they were students so they feel the need to pass that on to their current students. No, seriously though.. it all really depends on the prof and the toughness of the class. One of my professors will not give out an F because the class is incredibly tough. So a 45/100 is a B grade! A 15/100 is a D- and the lowest grade in the class was a 19

[Darth Wong]

There's a key difference: in an engineering faculty, if you AREN'T getting it, they flunk you. Mercilessly, without warning, and without reprieve. That's why two thirds of the incoming class is already gone by the end of the first year. In most humanities faculties, you virtually have to punch the professor in the face to get flunked out, and even then, you'd probably get a second chance.

Where is this happening? Here, if your GPA falls below 2.0, they throw your sorry ass on academic probation, and if you don't clean up your act in one semester, it's back to community college for you.

So? They do the same thing everywhere I've been too, but getting really low marks in an arts course is impossible unless you fail to hand in assignments. As long as you are reasonably diligent, you can pass arts; it's nice if you're intelligent, but it's not strictly necessary.

[Joe]

Science classes LIKE flunking students. The TAs and profs had a bitch of a time when they were students so they feel the need to pass that on to their current students. No, seriously though.. it all really depends on the prof and the toughness of the class. One of my professors will not give out an F because the class is incredibly tough. So a 45/100 is a B grade! A 15/100 is a D- and the lowest grade in the class was a 19

Let me guess, O. Chem?

[Trytostaydead]

Science classes LIKE flunking students. The TAs and profs had a bitch of a time when they were students so they feel the need to pass that on to their current students. No, seriously though.. it all really depends on the prof and the toughness of the class. One of my professors will not give out an F because the class is incredibly tough. So a 45/100 is a B grade! A 15/100 is a D- and the lowest grade in the class was a 19

Let me guess, O. Chem?

Hell no, with that generous curve.. I would've LIKED O. Chem. It's a neuro class, basically the physics involved in neuroscience. Thank God it's not equation heavy, but it's still a complete bitch.

[Joe]

Chem's just not my thing. I just didn't really want to deal with all the math. So naturally, being sick and tired of math, I became an Accounting major.

[Trytostaydead]

Chem's just not my thing. I just didn't really want to deal with all the math. So naturally, being sick and tired of math, I became an Accounting major.

You poor bastard. I hate math too.. hate it hate it hate it.. maybe because my roommate loved it so much.. but still, hate it hate it hate it.

[aerius]

So? They do the same thing everywhere I've been too, but getting really low marks in an arts course is impossible unless you fail to hand in assignments. As long as you are reasonably diligent, you can pass arts; it's nice if you're intelligent, but it's not strictly necessary.

Having taken some Humanities classes as part of my course distribution requirements, I have to agree with that. It's rather time consuming writing up all the 10-20 page reports, but there's nothing particularly hard about it. I BS'd half my papers, did minimal studying, and still ended up with B's, whereas I have to work my ass off and sleep-dep to have any chance of getting that in my engineering and computers courses. The one thing that can screw you over in Humanities is having a different viewpoint than the prof, but it ain't hard to pick up on what the prof wants and work your papers around that.