The Student Room Group

Why STEM is objectively superior to non STEM degrees.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by STEMisSuperior.
Yeah, the campus looks really nice and combining the courses are great. Would definitely recommend but i didnt initially apply for maths and econ, just Maths then requested to transfer. I personally didnt want to live in london and didnt like UCL maths that much but they're good for more of the applied stuff (guess thats what counts). But yh, all the best in the future. Note this is more of my alter ego speaking lol


Why dont you want to live in London?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by KazuoTakeda
Why dont you want to live in London?

Posted from TSR Mobile


It's just expensive
Reply 522
Agreed. STEM is superior in every measurable way, this should be made very clear to students from a young age. Whilst preference and interest should be the main reason for entering a course, it is definitely worth noting these facts.
That awkward moment when you realise maths is philosophy.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
That awkward moment when you realise maths is philosophy.


That awkward moment when you realise the M in STEM stands for maths.
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
That awkward moment when you realise the M in STEM stands for maths.


So philosophy, a humanities, underpins all of STEM.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
So philosophy, a humanities, underpins all of STEM.


Is Philosophy part of STEM? Can a philosopher do abstract algebra?
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
Is Philosophy part of STEM? Can a philosopher do abstract algebra?


You're just proving how an intellectual mind devoid of humanities is so stunted.

How are you even asking this question?

Who do you think Pythagoras was? Newton? Leibniz? I could go on.

Most of the stuff you praise STEM for is basically its ability to be incorporated into the dominant economic system in being able to churn out technicians. That puts it on more apar with polytechnics. I'm doing that now with knobs on in my computing masters, all I am learning is how to use a computer in ways that are needed in industry, it is very vocational. Where as the humanities are higher up the academic hierarchy in being about seeking knowledge for its own sake. Not that I would expect you to see that as it requires someone to actually think about things beyond getting a job in a bank.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
You're just proving how an intellectual mind devoid of humanities is so stunted.

How are you even asking this question?

Who do you think Pythagoras was?

Most of the stuff you praise STEM for is basically its ability to be incorporated into the dominant economic system in being able to churn out technicians. That puts it on more apar with polytechnics. Where as the humanities are higher up the academic hierarchy in being about seeking knowledge for its own sake. Not that I would expect you to see that as it requires someone to actually think about things beyond getting a job in a bank.


Perhaps philosophy does underpin Maths. There are fundamental assumptions we make in maths before we do anything. But it's about its use in this world.

How does it put it on par with polytechnics? Your logic does not follow. You seem to obsessed with analysing it deeper than necessary. STEM is a growing field, we've barely scraped the surface of physics, there are things in this universe we have yet to figure out. Technology is growing exponentially. You make it seem like everything has been discovered.

Humanities seek for knowledge does not help with the growth of our world and our as much as STEM does.
Oh - this thread is back is it... sigh.

How's your Economics degree going OP?
What good is a sociology degree so many people seem do one, seems like a waste of time
Original post by jneill
Oh - this thread is back is it... sigh.

How's your Economics degree going OP?


I do maths w/ econ actually.Which makes me 25% peasant.
Original post by jesus24
STEM is superior in every measurable way, this should be made very clear to students from a young age.


Even if that were true (which it almost certainly isn't), surely it could be an artefact if the benefits of non-STEM fields are more difficult to quantify and/or measure?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
Perhaps philosophy does underpin Maths. There are fundamental assumptions we make in maths before we do anything. But it's about its use in this world.

How does it put it on par with polytechnics? Your logic does not follow. You seem to obsessed with analysing it deeper than necessary. STEM is a growing field, we've barely scraped the surface of physics, there are things in this universe we have yet to figure out. Technology is growing exponentially. You make it seem like everything has been discovered.

Humanities seek for knowledge does not help with the growth of our world and our as much as STEM does.


I like how you assume science is only done to make technology. Science is done for it's own sake all the time. Galileo did not study the sky so that industrialisation could happen a century after his death.

It is on par with polytechnics in that it is vocational. Not knowledge for knowledge's sake, which is often seen as the peak of academia.

What is "deeper than neccecery"? You seem to believe STEM is superior because it leads to technological advancement. Well to me technological advancement is only positive if it improves humanities existence. Which means liberating people from exploitation and hardship, lower working hours for the masses etc. That involves economics and philosophy. I'm currently reading a book about Allende's Chili and a bunch of political actors and computer scientists trying to create a new economic system*. The book is about how technology is shaped by science and the political condition those things exist in. It combines STEM, history and philosophy. When you say I am obsessed with analysing to deep it just looks to me like you are not interested in looking any deeper beyond a very narrow viewpoint. Which is fine, but don't pretend there is no validity in looking deeper or rubbishing those who do.

*
https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/cybernetic-revolutionaries

Spoiler

(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by jesus24
STEM is superior in every measurable way,


Maybe that is because STEM only deals with things that are measurable? :facepalm:Show me the physics equation that tells me how to live a worthwhile life or what a worthwhile life even is.

What about the entirety of existence that is not measurable? There is so much science can not explain and may never explain. The frontiers of knowledge can move so slowly that we are forced to use none scientific means. Are we supposed to pretend these questions do not exist? How intellectual :rolleyes:

You guys can not see the wood for the trees.
(edited 7 years ago)
So you're saying someone studying History at Cambrdige won't get a better job or a more respectable degree than someone at, say, Greenwich? Or someone doing Law at a top Uni will earn less than someone doing Chemistry when it involves the big Law firms who pay silly amounts? No. Unless you're doing underwater basket weaving, they all just depend on how relevant the degree is to the job you want and what uni you went to. A degree in chemical engineering at Oxford, is just as commendable as a degree in History at the same uni, it's just a case of the former going into a job involving science, and the student taking history can go into law, IB, chartered accountancy etc etc. At a job like these, I would always prefer someone who can get their point across with evidence and efficiency, as opposed to someone who can test for salts and what not. Sure, it's still a great degree, but it's all about how relevant it is to your dream career.
Reply 536
Original post by That'sGreat
So you're saying someone studying History at Cambrdige won't get a better job or a more respectable degree than someone at, say, Greenwich? Or someone doing Law at a top Uni will earn less than someone doing Chemistry when it involves the big Law firms who pay silly amounts? No. Unless you're doing underwater basket weaving, they all just depend on how relevant the degree is to the job you want and what uni you went to. A degree in chemical engineering at Oxford, is just as commendable as a degree in History at the same uni, it's just a case of the former going into a job involving science, and the student taking history can go into law, IB, chartered accountancy etc etc. At a job like these, I would always prefer someone who can get their point across with evidence and efficiency, as opposed to someone who can test for salts and what not. Sure, it's still a great degree, but it's all about how relevant it is to your dream career.


A graduate of any subject can apply to do law, not just humanities.
Original post by That'sGreat
So you're saying someone studying History at Cambrdige won't get a better job or a more respectable degree than someone at, say, Greenwich? Or someone doing Law at a top Uni will earn less than someone doing Chemistry when it involves the big Law firms who pay silly amounts? No. Unless you're doing underwater basket weaving, they all just depend on how relevant the degree is to the job you want and what uni you went to. A degree in chemical engineering at Oxford, is just as commendable as a degree in History at the same uni, it's just a case of the former going into a job involving science, and the student taking history can go into law, IB, chartered accountancy etc etc. At a job like these, I would always prefer someone who can get their point across with evidence and efficiency, as opposed to someone who can test for salts and what not. Sure, it's still a great degree, but it's all about how relevant it is to your dream career.


the former can go into everything the latter can and more, which is kinda the point of that side of the argument.

still a pointless debate tho.

Posted from TSR Mobile
As if you'd actually dig up your own 6 month old thread. :rolleyes:
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
That awkward moment when you realise the M in STEM stands for maths.


...and there's no P (for Philosophy) in STEM :biggrin:

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending