Is History the most pointless subject to do a degree in?

Scroll to see replies

But then could your argument work the other way..? Could one read Wikipedia for maths, of physics instead of (as stated in your words) 'wasting time and money doing a degree in it'. As there is another 'worthwhile' degree. And back to Wikipedia. It's unreliable (in the majority of cases).

For maths, use a calculator :tongue:

Reply 41

RtGOAT

Original post by halbeth

I'd like to add I'm not arguing for the merit of history over STEM subjects or anything like that, simply that the OP's argument is fairly invalid.

Invalid? How so?

I could learn any history topic in a matter of hours, whats the point of studying it for a degree?

Reply 42

ilickbatteries

Original post by Rybee

I study Law, at Masters level.

Direct this at someone who studies History, they'll be able to inform you better than myself...

I have a friend doing his final year of a four-year law programme.

He isn't optimistic about finding a job. Apparently there are a lot more law graduates than there are law jobs.

Best of luck to you. Hopefully in reality you're a much more eloquent and well-informed individual than you come across as on here :smile:

Reply 43

RtGOAT

Original post by halbeth

As someone who knows people who mark the history papers at York I can guarantee: you rely on wikipedia alone for a history degree and you will get best a 3rd, if not a fail.

A third or a first, in history it doesn't really matter, equally useless.

Reply 44

ilickbatteries

Original post by LexiswasmyNexis

What a stupid discussion. People who post this kind of rubbish don't know what a History degree entails.

Also this tedious A DEGREE MUST GIVE YOU SPECIFIC JOB SKILLS attitude is pretty grating.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Who said that it must?

Reply 45

username948920

Original post by ilickbatteries

No. Perhaps you've misunderstood what I mean.

I'm asking if the skills mentioned (research, organisation) can be learned from any essay-based subject.

Your response leads me to believe that you view history degrees as bestowing greater research and organisation skills to graduates than a media degree.

I am of the opinion that you have to do research and organise yourself for pretty much every degree. Do you believe that history is different in some way?

The skills you gain are different. A media graduate will have some qualities which are superior and a history graduate will have some qualities that are superior.

Reply 46

LexiswasmyNexis

Original post by RtGOAT

Invalid? How so?

I could learn any history topic in a matter of hours, whats the point of studying it for a degree?

Typical factual nonsense. There is more to history than "what happened when".

(and no, I don't study history and haven't since A-level)

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 47

halbeth

Original post by Rybee

I study Law, at Masters level.

Direct this at someone who studies History, they'll be able to inform you better than myself...

Many who work in the humanities at an academic level have started to move towards interdisciplinarity because there has been an increasing recognition that there is a huge amount of crossover. From an employment perspective the skills are indeed the same for many degrees, but that doesn't reduce their inherent value: if the skills are the same why not present a good variety of interesting options?

Note: these skills are NOT necessarily taught to STEM students, though many are. RtGoat's apparent willingness to accept that certain historical events transpired as facts according to wikipedia demonstrates this fairly well.

Reply 48

Olie

Original post by RtGOAT

Understanding maths and physics is not as simple as reading about what happened a number of years ago.

Lol, that's like me saying maths is just adding up and doing sums, don't criticise something you're ignorant of, contrary to popular belief studying history at university is more than just remembering dates. I'm not saying its the most difficult subject to do, far from it, I recognise there may be much harder subjects but its certainly not 'simple'.

Reply 49

RtGOAT

Original post by LexiswasmyNexis

But if it doesn't give you any specific job skills whats the point of doing it? Just feed your interest with Wikipedia.

Reply 50

halbeth

Original post by RtGOAT

Invalid? How so?

I could learn any history topic in a matter of hours, whats the point of studying it for a degree?

Beginning to become fairly certain you're a troll, but nevertheless...

Go on then, I challenge you to do so. I'd be interested to see just how well you successfully 'learn' it.

In answer to your question: your argument was that you can learn all there is to learn about history on wikipedia. I just gave you an example of why you can't. Your argument is invalid.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 51

LexiswasmyNexis

Original post by ilickbatteries

Who said that it must?

So many tools on TSR. Every time someone wants to undermine a subject here, it's always

1) I could learn that for free on the Internet; and

2) What specific skills does X give you? What career does X qualify you for?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 52

RtGOAT

Original post by Olie

Maths gets far more complicated than that, and you know it.

History does not get more complicated than recalling what happened in the past.

Reply 53

Azarimanka

Original post by RtGOAT

You're argument is stupid.

Anyone who can read can learn just as much, and then some, as a history grad.

The same cannot be said of a STEM subject, sure it maybe possible to learn it off the internet but it is a damn sight harder then simply reading. Not to mention any job in a STEM field would require a relevant degree. A history degree would only be a requisite to become a professor and in doing so the worthless cylce goes on.

But people with a history degree could probably spell cycle, and know the difference between your and you're. Forgive me for calling you out as an idiot.

Reply 54

halbeth

Original post by RtGOAT

Maths gets far more complicated than that, and you know it.

History does not get more complicated than recalling what happened in the past.

Incorrect. Try reading some historiography or philosophy of history.

Reply 55

diggy

Original post by RtGOAT

I'm not a science student.

Could I learn the content of a history degree using the internet in my room? Yes.

Could I find a cure for cancer using the internet in my room? No.

Science is far more useful.

i like history for its vast array of answers and the way in which arguements are deduced and to say history is stupid is rather silly seeing as everything around us is formed by events in history ie. Margret Thatcher. It also provides a persons anaylitcal views to grow for instance i could have flamed you for hating on history but i'd rather attempt to find the logic for your ideas

But i also like science for its direct approach because it allows to me understand how things work in a certain way and why they do

Reply 56

LexiswasmyNexis

Original post by RtGOAT

But if it doesn't give you any specific job skills whats the point of doing it? Just feed your interest with Wikipedia.

Wy would I do that and struggle with doing a degree as well when I can just do what I'm interested in for my degree, doss around a bit, build my EC profile and then use the bit of paper to get a grad job?

Much more efficient that way. Maybe you're sore because you didn't..

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 57

ClaydonR

Original post by RtGOAT

A third or a first, in history it doesn't really matter, equally useless.

Wow, you are a moron.

History covers so many areas - political theory, economics, sociology etc. and requires some intensive research skills that are useful in a wide variety of sectors of employment.

Who are you to belittle a subject that people such as Clement Attlee and Salman Rushdie studied? Clearly not useless, people can study what they want - if you want something pointless aim your bile at Surfing studies for Christs sake, not History.

Reply 58

ClaydonR

Also on the wikipedia front - you can fuel ANY INTEREST IN ANY SUBJECT by it, not just History. So your 'wikipedia' criticism applies to every subject, ever known, ever.

Reply 59

Olie

Original post by RtGOAT

A third or a first, in history it doesn't really matter, equally useless.

Why is it useless :facepalm:

Sure its not going to lead to a job in science or medicine but like others have already said, history graduates go onto to do all sorts of jobs as the course has many transferable skills.