Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Oh wow do you have a death wish or something? Seriously it would have been easier to type "I WANT TO BE TORN APART BY LANGUAGES/ARTS/SOCIAL SCIENCE STUDENTS PLEASE GET ANGRY AT ME FOR I NEED CONSTANT VALIDATION"

    Lmao all the proof I need that STEM folks are easily the most pretentious people
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Implication)
    indeed, i'm sure individuals learn a bit here and there on their undergrad courses regardless of whether they're STEM or not. they're transferable skills that are picked up more from employment, experience and other 'extra-curricular' stuff.

    to be honest, STEM vs. non-STEM probably is on the list of things some employers consider, with (i suspect) STEM being slightly favoured. but it's right at the bottom of that list, and most really don't give a **** about your degree except where you use it to demonstrate those key skills
    I agree with you on that

    Also off topic but I see you study mathematical physics, do you mind me asking how you found it? I am changing to theoretical physics (from physics) but bit concerned about the maths in second year, I am not bad at maths and hopefully getting firsts in both my 'maths 2 module' and linear algebra this semester but everyone else appears to do no work and still do great. Ill be doing groups, vector spaces, non linear differential equations, fluid dynamics and some geometry of surfaces and curves (other maths too but these are the modules that are meant to be harder)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    You are confusing directness with rudeness.Where I come from you speak your mind.
    it's probably not sensible to have a discussion on the ethics of manners in this thread, so i won't go on... but really, wherever you come from, i think's it good to try and say what you have to say without causing upset to other people wherever possible!
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Implication)
    it's probably not sensible to have a discussion on the ethics of manners in this thread, so i won't go on... but really, wherever you come from, i think's it good to try and say what you have to say without causing upset to other people wherever possible!
    Well, you have to think about something else... Is it his fault that so many people are over-sensitive nowadays? Also, should the world change just because those same over-sensitive people do not like it?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by madmadmax321)
    I agree with you on that

    Also off topic but I see you study mathematical physics, do you mind me asking how you found it? I am changing to theoretical physics (from physics) but bit concerned about the maths in second year, I am not bad at maths and hopefully getting firsts in both my 'maths 2 module' and linear algebra this semester but everyone else appears to do no work and still do great. Ill be doing groups, vector spaces, non linear differential equations, fluid dynamics and some geometry of surfaces and curves (other maths too but these are the modules that are meant to be harder)
    no not at all dude, that's fine

    where do you study? I don't think the difference between theoretical and mathematical physics is that rigorously/unambiguously defined, but very roughly mathematical physics takes known physics, observations etc. and tries to formalise the mathematics to make it rigorous and consistent, where theoretical physics deals with the modelling and construction of theories in the first place. At undergraduate level where most of what you're doing is learning the theory yourself, it *probably* doesn't make a huge amount of difference beyond the way in which you're taught the material. When compared to straight physics, the difference is probably just replacing labs with more theory! What's the difference between the courses at your institution?

    To be honest, most people probably do more work than you think they do. Even those who seem to slack off during term time probably work pretty hard at their cramming when it comes to exam season, and that tends to work quite well for a lot of people with maths in particular. I find Mathematical Physics suits me very well, as I'm much happier with rigorous deduction and mathematics than the sort of hand-waving we do in physics a lot. However, some people seem to rely on that hand-waving intuition and don't like to get too bogged down in the detail, so it perhaps depends on what you like!

    I think the main two things to think about are:

    (a) how confident are you with maths? You don't need to be a genius busting out 85% in every exam, but there will be more maths in theoretical than applied.

    (b) where do you want to go with your study? If you want to learn some quantum field theory (particle physics) or general relativity, you're going to have to learn these hard mathematical concepts whether you like it or not. Apart from the fluid dynamics (which may still come up a bit in cosmology if you do a bit of that alongside GR), all the classes you mentioned are going to be necessary. You may as well get a handle on them now when they're being taught from the basics - otherwise you're going to have to try and learn bits and pieces here and there as and when you need them, which can end up being a lot harder. If you're more interested in slightly applied physics (e.g. semiconductors, information science etc.), then this maths probably won't be so important, but if fundamental physics is your thing then I say it's best to get started asap! Moreover, most straight physics courses won't actually teach any general relativity until Masters-level and you won't see quantum field theory at all. You'll probably need to look at mathematical/theoretical if you want to do some of that stuff in your undergraduate course.


    Anyway sorry for waffling on, hopefully I've said something useful! Pm me again questions if you like and I'll try to help I'm just about to have my 4th year finals so I've nearly been through all the undergrad stuff!
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broscientist)
    Well, you have to think about something else... Is it his fault that so many people are over-sensitive nowadays? Also, should the world change just because those same over-sensitive people do not like it?
    eh i'm not too interested in throwing around blame. where you draw the line at what constitutes 'over-sensitivity' is kind of arbitrary though, no? i'm not at all saying you should never offend anyone, just i don't think it's right to unnecessarily upset someone. if you can convey the same meaning without making someone else suffer, why make them suffer?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    Why is telling the truth belittling, if you can't handle the truth, go elsewhere.
    It's belittling because it's not the truth. Where is your objective data that proves that ALL non stem students will work in a coffee shop?

    As a grown man, you should know better.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Implication)
    When are you going to respond to the fact that superiority is necessarily subjective?




    As I've repeatedly said, you haven't demonstrated that you've considered all criteria. Why should I believe you? The onus is on you.




    How about the one I just mentioned in my last post: is STEM better at training students for research? How about whether STEM is better at preparing students for careers in journalism? Media? HR? Is STEM better at developing writing skills? Do STEM students enjoy greater life satisfaction? Do they find their degrees and/or careers more enjoyable and/or fulfilling?




    I don't know what you're referring to and I'm not sure what you're saying I haven't looked at.




    To my knowledge you haven't done so in our conversation. I don't intend to read through every single post you've ever made on the off chance that something you posted is relevant to what I'm talking to you about now!




    How irrational. That is only of the slightest relevance to my overarching argument. Either way, I've now done so.




    That isn't what objective means. And no, you haven't. See above.




    Do you actually know what 'objective' means? It doesn't mean that either.




    That's not how logic works.




    You'd be surprised. What's your STEM experience? And what's your non-STEM experience?

    I suspect an impartial observer would disagree with you strongly about which of us seems the most butthurt.




    You have completely failed to engage with my primary point that superiority is subjective by definition. How you have the audacity to say I'm ignoring you repeatedly is beyond me, when I've responded to every single individual point you have made in our discussion and you've straight up ignored entire paragraphs of what I've posted.




    You make a claim, you demonstrate it. Otherwise I could make all sorts of ridiculous, unfalsifiable claims and demand that you disprove me. You wouldn't be able to (by the definition of an unfalsifiable claim), but that wouldn't make what I say any less dumb.

    If you assert something, the onus is on you to demonstrate that it is true.




    Why will I need to do that? As I've repeatedly stated (and you've repeatedly ignored), my entire point is that your premise is flawed. I'm not advocating the opposing view (that non-STEM is better); I'm telling you that the entire argument is ridiculous because superiority is not objective.
    You couldnt even give one example of a criteria that i havent considered. Thank you got proving my point that ive considered all that is possible
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    It's belittling because it's not the truth. Where is your objective data that proves that ALL non stem students will work in a coffee shop?

    As a grown man, you should know better.
    No one has said this, this is your own insecurities talking.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by STEMisSuperior.)
    You couldnt even give one example of a criteria that i havent considered. Thank you got proving my point that ive considered all that is possible
    I gave seven. Please reread my post.



    As I've stated I think five times now, superiority itself is subjective. Claiming something is 'objectively superior' to another is just nonsense. You have not responded to this objection at all so far.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    Lmao my other brother did Neuroscience at university. My sister's graduating with a degree in Languages. She's being paid more in her first job than he did.

    So whatever you are saying is just either generalisations or total BS.
    anecdotal fallacy, sure there's examples like this but in general that isnt the trend at all.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by STEMisSuperior.)
    No one has said this, this is your own insecurities talking.
    If you read back, that is exactly what he said.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by STEMisSuperior.)
    anecdotal fallacy, sure there's examples like this but in general that isnt the trend at all.
    You haven't given evidence babeeee.

    I've seen your posts and you pretty much dodge every point. Sad you made a tsr account just to belittle Arts students. It's just pathetic.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Implication)
    I gave seven. Please reread my post.



    As I've stated I think five times now, superiority itself is subjective. Claiming something is 'objectively superior' to another is just nonsense.
    LOOL ok.

    We look at it generally, i can also list 100000s of questions such as ''Will non STEM prepare you for a career in engineering? exotic derivs trading? Statistician?" and so on. Your point is irrelevant since ive looked at it in generic terms. In that sense, as already said, STEM does open up to more careers than non STEM.

    Writing skills doesnt require a degree, it needs some intuition and reading skills, a degree isnt necessary.

    finally you have contradicted yourself massively - You argue with me because apparently im not being objective yet you suggest criteria that is wholly subjective. Irony eh?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    You haven't given evidence babeeee.

    I've seen your posts and you pretty much dodge every point. Sad you made a tsr account just to belittle Arts students. It's just pathetic.
    go back, i have already given links to prove this.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by STEMisSuperior.)
    go back, i have already given links to prove this.
    Considering you can't even write a sentence properly, I can see why you're desperately trying to big up STEM subjects.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    Considering you can't even write a sentence properly, I can see why you're desperately trying to big up STEM subjects.
    aww im sorry but my 2A*s in my english GCSEs says otherwise.

    Its the internet, no one gives a damn about sentencing properly.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by STEMisSuperior.)
    aww im sorry but my 2A*s in my english GCSEs says otherwise.

    Its the internet, no one gives a damn about sentencing properly.
    Did you bribe the examiner or did you get it from some dodgy website?

    Tbh nobody gives a damn about your pathetic need to make non STEM students feel bad about themselves. Your ignorance is both hilarious and tragic. Take up knitting perhaps?
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Maker)
    Do you have any examples of non stem people working in cancer research?
    Maybe some cancer patients enjoy a bit of Shakespeare, or Van Gogh, or Adele... Maybe they even value the humanities as much as the science that might help them. Maybe it's the humanities that gives them something to live for, whilst acknowledging it's the science that enables it.

    It seems very strange you want to guilt-trip non-STEM people and yet you (rightly) allow your daughter to follow her own path... odd.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TinyPhasma)
    Oh wow do you have a death wish or something? Seriously it would have been easier to type "I WANT TO BE TORN APART BY LANGUAGES/ARTS/SOCIAL SCIENCE STUDENTS PLEASE GET ANGRY AT ME FOR I NEED CONSTANT VALIDATION"

    Lmao all the proof I need that STEM folks are easily the most pretentious people

    Could not rep this enough.

    He made an account just to make a thread so he could try and bring down his insecurity. Ironically it makes him look more insecure and pathetic because all he does is belittle.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.