StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Trytostaydead wrote:

Marcus wrote: That said, the things ive heard about changes in education policy, even at major ivy-league schools, quite literally turned my stoumach, even as a student who sometimes might wish he had more time for girls and less time for studies. .

Ivy leagues are funny stuff. Not ONE Ivy league accepted my friend. She was ranked in the TOP FIVE for National AP boards, excellent concert pianist, track, and did lots of volunteer works. Funny stuff.

You have to have connections to go Ivy League, I think.

Durran Korr wrote:

Trytostaydead wrote:Ivy leagues are funny stuff. Not ONE Ivy league accepted my friend. She was ranked in the TOP FIVE for National AP boards, excellent concert pianist, track, and did lots of volunteer works. Funny stuff.

You have to have connections to go Ivy League, I think.

"Mr. Burns, test scores like Larry's would require the donation of an international airport."
"Yale could use an international airport, Mr. Burns."
"Are you mad?! I'm not made of airports! Get out!"

Durandal wrote:

Durran Korr wrote:

Trytostaydead wrote:Ivy leagues are funny stuff. Not ONE Ivy league accepted my friend. She was ranked in the TOP FIVE for National AP boards, excellent concert pianist, track, and did lots of volunteer works. Funny stuff.

You have to have connections to go Ivy League, I think.

"Mr. Burns, test scores like Larry's would require the donation of an international airport."
"Yale could use an international airport, Mr. Burns."
"Are you mad?! I'm not made of airports! Get out!"

How rich IS Burns. I mean, he seems to just run one nuclear power plant in a small city.. how much wealth could he have?

As rich as Matt Groening wants him to be. To be serious, I'm sure most of his wealth is not in money. The plant surely makes him a bundle and he does skimp on necessary maintenance (barrels of waste sitting around, gum plugging up leaks in the cooling towers) and adequately trained personal (Mike, would you want to work in a plant where Homer Simpson was the guy making sure the reactors were working as they should?) yet he must be paying a fortune in bribes to keep the NRC off his back.
Also, I am a Humanities major (BA English) and am now pursuing a JD, but in all honesty I never was much for postmodernist theory or literature except maybe a couple (Coetzee, Ginsberg). I am more of a Modernist thinker and a Marxist theorist.

Trytostaydead wrote: How rich IS Burns. I mean, he seems to just run one nuclear power plant in a small city.. how much wealth could he have?

In one episode he loses all his money, and he ends up with $100,000,000, I think. However, he probably made money since then.

Durran Korr wrote:

Trytostaydead wrote:Ivy leagues are funny stuff. Not ONE Ivy league accepted my friend. She was ranked in the TOP FIVE for National AP boards, excellent concert pianist, track, and did lots of volunteer works. Funny stuff.

You have to have connections to go Ivy League, I think.

I suppose it depends on the program you're trying to get into, but I had no issues whatsoever getting accepted into Princeton on my SAT scores. The swimming scholarship I got to help cover my tuition costs came at a much later date, well after I'd been accepted into my program.

Zoink wrote:

Trytostaydead wrote: How rich IS Burns. I mean, he seems to just run one nuclear power plant in a small city.. how much wealth could he have?

In one episode he loses all his money, and he ends up with $100,000,000, I think. However, he probably made money since then.

He also had at one time a 1 trillion dollar bill that he lost to Castro. That's why Cuba is still there.

I do not agree that humanities majors are brought out to be stupid compared to those in science and maths. That is just not right. Not everone can be good at the same thing. Social stuidies can be just as difficult as any math or science, depending on how your brain works.


Also, everyone cannot be an engineer. Thats why you need...Teachers, Historians, Sociologists.... They are all equally important to a well balanced society.

Strate_Egg wrote:I do not agree that humanities majors are brought out to be stupid compared to those in science and maths. That is just not right.

They're not made to be stupid. However, the entrance requirements are low enough that stupid people can easily get into the program, and they're not ruthless like the engineering folks so the stupid people can graduate, thus devaluing the resulting degree. Ando admitted as much, but he's understandably sensitive about what he sees as sci/eng snobbery.

Not everone can be good at the same thing. Social stuidies can be just as difficult as any math or science, depending on how your brain works.

That's blatantly false. I helped write social studies term papers when I was in school as a favour for arts students; it's pathetically easy. I could do social studies in my sleep.

Also, everyone cannot be an engineer. Thats why you need...Teachers, Historians, Sociologists.... They are all equally important to a well balanced society.

You need garbagemen too, but that doesn't have any bearing on the question of how much intelligence is required in order to become one.

Being the son of a man with a doctorate in history, I must take any snub at history to be a very deep and personal insult.

Pistols at dawn.


...seriously, though, both the arts and the sciences are required. The sciences define civilization- the arts define culture. Without the sciences, mankind as we know it would not exist, but without the arts we would all be rather bland and tasteless.

Further, a liberal arts student does not, by definetion, have a lower intelligence than an engineering student. Yes, stupid people get in, and in things like philosophy, where one can drop a log and call it Brilliance, stupid people soar, but in properly rigorous courses the stupid can be rather quickly culled.

I once heard history described as a sort of science. Seems a bit odd, since while history is objective- and historians should be objective- interpretations of history seem to be inherently subjective.

HemlockGrey wrote:snip

I once heard history described as a sort of science. Seems a bit odd, since while history is objective- and historians should be objective- interpretations of history seem to be inherently subjective.

Interpetations on History will always be subjective, and properly so. Some would say Patton was brilliant, others will say he was not, depends on how you veiw the facts. But you must know the facts to make any kind of judgement on anything.
Mind you, I know of science majors who dont know what sandpaper is, or how to grow their own food, I guess prectical skills are not always taught at university.