Which of the following is the most worthless?

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
You mean computer science?

Far from it! I would never dare to say such a thing! I mean... uh... disciplines like Mathematical Science, Physical Science and so on.

[Asher]

Originally posted by MRT144
if we were talking about who had a better chance of spreading their genes

The richer.

[Asher]

Originally posted by MRT144
Saying that people who go after natural career paths for innate talents

Your entire post rests on this concept of innate talents. I don't think there is such a thing, talents are created through experiences and practice.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
And science types are desperately worthless at philosophy... usually can't even understand the basic premice of a text.
If you want to bang your head on the wall, work as a TA in a Philosophy of Science 101 course.

Maybe they're thinking over your level. I took three philosophy courses and aced them all, and it was the filosofy students who were laughably bad in Philosophy of Logic I and II.

[Fake Boris]

You were spitting your lecture notes. You didn't really understand.

[Asher]

Yeah, that must be it. It's real hard for us types to engage in critical thinking, you artsy do it on such a regular basis...like in this thread.

PS: lecture notes? That would imply I wasted time going to most philosophy lectures... You skimread the text the night before exams or before you write a paper to get the vocab. down then you just think it through. It's a joke.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by MRT144


so pro athletes are smarter than you? im pretty sure that most athletes study communications or something else.

Pro athletes use their education?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by MRT144
I'm impressed that KH of all people made the incorrect correlation between intelligence and income levels.

I didn't make any such assertion, you maroon.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
And science types are desperately worthless at philosophy... usually can't even understand the basic premice of a text.
If you want to bang your head on the wall, work as a TA in a Philosophy of Science 101 course.

I took a 300 level course entitled "the history and philosophy of science".

I was one of only ~5 students in a class of 120 to get an A

I'd never taken a history or philosophy class before, by the way. The teacher (whose specialty was the philosophy of science) made a number of ridiculous mistakes when discussing the conclusions and methodologies of Newton and Galileo.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
You were spitting your lecture notes. You didn't really understand.

Oh yeah. Logic is so ****ing hard. Computer scientists never have to use logic at all.

[rah]

This is getting hilarious. One more example, not to be intended as proof.

As a computer engineering student in a world class program, I struggled to maintain a "B" average.
Once I transferred to a soft science, I graduated with Highest Honors.

So even though I have defended the soft sciences here, I can not and will not consider them equal academic challanges.

[Asher]

soft science = poli sci?

[rah]

Yes.

[Eli]

So even though I have defended the soft sciences here, I can not and will not consider them equal academic challanges.

Agreed. And the reason that people who study the soft stuff think that both degrees are equally challenging is that they got used to everything being easier and so they end up spending the same amount of time studying.

Though the writing skills of most engineers, or actually any skill beyond what they've learned, simply suck. Luckily, they're easy to learn.

[KrazyHorse]

Engineers in general are not particularly smart. Some are, but most are barely above normal intelligence with a better-than-average mathematical sense.

Again, that's just an observation of the average undergraduate. I will note that the leap between the abilities of undergraduate and graduate engineers is larger than the leap between the abilities of undergraduate and graduate physical scientists/mathematicians.