Why STEM is objectively superior to non STEM degrees.

Original post by infairverona

I think in a lot of cases languages are more valuable than pure abstract STEM.

yeah... no.

Reply 81

Original post by STEMisSuperior.

yeah... no.

Ok well I think learning a language to fluency is far more useful than pure maths, what are you going to do with that in the real world?

Reply 82

Original post by infairverona

Ok well I think learning a language to fluency is far more useful than pure maths, what are you going to do with that in the real world?

LOL.

Maths can be used for accountancy, finance (S&T, derivs trading, quant etc etc), actuarial career, stats careers, engineering, meteorology, programming, data science, programming etc etc etc (wayy too many for me to list) No uni just teaches pure maths, they teach a lot more applied maths nowadays. Even for jobs where the degree itself doesnt matter, maths is good because it shows intelligence and aptitude, hence why an investment bank sees maths>language grad

Funnily enough, most maths programmes are flexible nowadays and you can even do language modules and show off on your CV.

With a language degree? You can talk to foreigners but soon they will all learn English too. Technology built by a mathmo will break down that language barrier and english will become the worlds secong language.

If you seriously think a maths degree and a language degree is equal in terms of career prospects then you're objectively wrong.

Reply 83

Original post by infairverona

I think in a lot of cases languages are more valuable than pure abstract STEM.

Original post by STEMisSuperior.

yeah... no.

Someone who can't apply their theoretical STEM knowledge practically is of little use compared to someone who has written fluency in another language, the latter has a very useful skill. Obtaining written fluency at a high level is a totally different ball game to oral fluency.

Reply 84

LelouchViRuge

woah

I thought Mathematics was a language too :frown:

Reply 85

Original post by JamesN88

Except that uni programs at a top uni does teach application and practicality.

You can acc choose language modules at uni if you wished to do so.

Reply 86

Tom5pence

Original post by infairverona

Law isn't mostly memorising. If you memorise a list of cases and statutes and then you go and just write those in the exam without applying them to the facts, you will fail. It's a lot of analysis, application, knowing context and policy/politics stuff around it too.

If you think the whole point of your degree is to get a good job then I mostly agree with you about STEM actually. But typically the kind of people who take English etc aren't aiming for a top job, they 'love their subject'. Funny how a lot of English, History etc grads end up doing a Law conversion anyway when they realise the only real job for them with those subjects is to be a teacher. But saying that I don't really see the point in something like a pure Maths degree either, Engineering, science etc sure. There's a guy at my work with a masters in Maths from Cambridge and he gets paid less than me with a 2.1 in Law from an average Russell Group uni.

Out of interest, what uni did you go to?

Reply 87

Original post by STEMisSuperior.

Except that uni programs at a top uni does teach application and practicality.

You can acc choose language modules at uni if you wished to do so.

I was quoting a comment related to "pure STEM" which I understood to mean pure theory?

Taking a few language modules doesn't equate to the level of knowledge gained from exclusive study, as I said the gulf between oral and written fluency is a wide one.

I'm a STEM student myself but I appreciate the value of other study areas. For example we wouldn't know about historical events if historians hadn't bothered to record them.

Reply 88

Original post by JamesN88

My point was there is no degree nowadays that teach only Pure theory, most have additional emphasis on the applied side of it.

Reply 89

Original post by STEMisSuperior.

My point was there is no degree nowadays that teach only Pure theory, most have additional emphasis on the applied side of it.

I made no mention of degree course content, I was simply voicing my opinion on the real world usefulness of two different sets of knowledge, one of them being pure theoretical knowledge of a STEM subject.

Reply 90

Original post by JamesN88

It's naive of you to narrow it down like that; You're comparing the most valuable only skill set of a language grad to only one (least useful) of many skills that a STEM grad has

Reply 91

Original post by STEMisSuperior.

It's naive of you to narrow it down like that; You're comparing the most valuable only skill set of a language grad to only one (least useful) of many skills that a STEM grad has

I didn't set the goalposts for comparison, but merely offered an opinion about a comparison that had already been made.

There's no denying that approaching tasks requiring organisation with a scientific mind often yields results, which is why STEM grads get employed in roles unrelated to their degree.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 92

Original post by Broscientist

[video="youtube;OOfmy6zlh_k"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOfmy6zlh_k[/video]

No offence, but that statement was just laughable and just proves you have no idea how empowering sciences are.

I work in science...

Reply 93

Original post by infairverona

I work in science...

You did a law degree.

Reply 94

Original post by infairverona

I work in science...

[e] I also, unfortunately, don't speak any other languages. But I think it's quite a stupid attitude to not be able to recognise the value of other certain subjects like languages.

Reply 95