Is it good policy to give financial aid to liberal arts majors?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by GePap
Re: TCO

You could argue that social norms influence sexual selection within communities, thus creating an "intelligence differential" based on the view of intelligence in a partner. Of course, then you have to stack this up with just random mutatiuons and 'natural' selection to see how influential one is against another in a population.

Yea, but then there's a pogrom and someone is raped by a Russian and all that good work is wasted.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Colonâ„¢


Just to make clear, humanities was considered to be part of arts in this study?

Yes.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

In the end, it is the ones who make the decisions, the ones who wield the power who have the most control and decide the shape of the world.

True enough, but then again there are only a handful of these people who wield real power. On average, you're a lot better off becoming an egghead with a good chance of a high-paying job than you are a poli-sci major who has a one-in-a-million chance at being a leader and a much more likely future as a low-paid civil service peon...

Yes indeed.

[Agathon]

I now remember why I didn't want to do science.

It seems to in the main produce small-minded, vulgar people who lack the ability to feel or empathize with others.

Why waste your life on such boring things? Art is, and always has been, greater than the poor fare offered by our scientists.

What amuses me is that in 200 years the science you are studying now will probably be regarded in the same way that we think of Galen's ideas.

[KrazyHorse]

Leafs suck.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Leafs suck.

Still?

I haven't been following the NHL for some time. I haven't watched television (other than a couple of Newcastle games) in weeks.

[Agathon]

I see they were 8-0-2 in their last ten games. Still not enough to make the playoffs, but at least they gave it their best.

I wonder if Quinn will retire/be fired.

[Pekka]

right.. You didn't get into science because you didn't have what it takes most likely. Or you wanted to have sympathy for people, which is of course a huge skill that has no value, thus its value is priceless.

Aren't you the same one who actually lectures in Uni and at the same time challenged Asher that you can take him in a fight? I realize you got pissed off and out of balance, but it seems to me it's happening again. What's the problem? Are you stressed out or what? Relax big cat.. it's just a debate..

[Lawrence of Arabia]

LoA, well, Unis are a business, however in here they are publicly funded. And there are no big tuition costs.

However there are businesses sponsoring certain fields, technology fields and especially anything to do with computer science is heavily sponsored.

I also go to a publicly funded university - but that doesnt stop them from acting like a business, and looking for funding whereever possible. they just built a totally new bio engineering building, with funds from a n alum ($50 million or so) The difference is that for the music building, they have to go to the state to ask for a new one, while for the 'hard' subjects, they get private funding.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Agathon
I now remember why I didn't want to do science.

It seems to in the main produce small-minded, vulgar people who lack the ability to feel or empathize with others.

Why waste your life on such boring things? Art is, and always has been, greater than the poor fare offered by our scientists.

What amuses me is that in 200 years the science you are studying now will probably be regarded in the same way that we think of Galen's ideas.

You left out the math being hard, sour-grape wolfie.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
The only people I ever even saw in a physics course at or above the 300 level were physics majors, graduate chemistry students, graduate electrical engineering students and math majors.

Only the physics and math people manage to keep up. The chem and EE people ask dumb questions and fail the class.

Meanwhile, I waltzed in to a 300 level history class and got an A- with ease (only formal history class I took after high school).

History or english literature or poly sci are a bit different than other fields. In math, you can't hack calculus if you don't know algebra. In history, the only thing that really builds foundation is historiography or maybe a methods of research class. And they have a hard time with those and then don't use them much (unless you go to grad school and then you know and use that ****). But an individual topic at 300/400 level is just an individual topic. The key thing is to find the interesting/challenging 300/400 level class amongst the mix. They do exist. Usually they will be difficult because the class will be pushed to a higher level of insight/analsysis/rigor. It has nothing to do with the difficulty of the "subject". Just how the instructor approaches it. That is very different from math/science. There's not that much you can do to dumb down a calculus course. At the end of the day...you have to do integrals and derivatives.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Anybody who doesn't know how to communicate by the time they're 18 isn't going to learn how to do so in some ****ty humanities class.

I disagree. I have had people train me to communicate better. And a lot of the trick came after I was 18. I still could use more.

[TCO]

Originally posted by GePap


Hmmm? NOT physics?

Hey, right in one try.

econ grad school is NOTORIOUS for emphasizing math, for placing little value on incoming knowledge of econ, for practically WANTING people to come in with Theoretical Stats undergrads. For econ u/g's crying about this and for them failing out of the grad schools.

Now, MBA school is another kettle of fish entirely...

[TCO]

Originally posted by GePap


Here is the simplified version for the self- satisfied eggheads:

Eggheads (to use a term of endearment) are valued because they with their brainy little ways create new tools, methods, new things that create new potentials, new activites, new ways to harness power. For that, they are valued and handsomely rewarded.

BUT the eggheads do NOT wield the power. They don't control it. They don;t decide how it is used.

To put is simply: Eggheads might makes nukes, but they are not the ones who decide who gets nuked.

In the end, it is the ones who make the decisions, the ones who wield the power who have the most control and decide the shape of the world.

And they are not the eggheads.

I agree that analysis and leadership are different. Not sure if LA really helps make a better leader or if people who are good leaders but poor analysts go to LA because it is hackable. Maybe if you really want to be a great leader, you should spend a lot of time on sports.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Pekka
right.. You didn't get into science because you didn't have what it takes most likely. Or you wanted to have sympathy for people, which is of course a huge skill that has no value, thus its value is priceless.

I was the best combined science and math student at my high school. I was being guided towards doing both by my teachers. Fortunately, sanity prevailed.