Why the liberal arts are stupid

[xerx]

STEM subjects are harder than liberal arts. Smart people go into science or engineering. And arts students are stupid, even the ones who attended Harvard / Oxford because they can't do math / maths.

Prove me wrong, arts students. Prove me wrong. Oh, wait, you can't because you didn't study mathematical proof.

[xerx]

Shakespeare was stupid or he would have been an engineer.

[FreelancePoliceman]

STEM subjects are harder than liberal arts.

In undergraduate programs this is probably true. The skills necessary to conduct, say, historical research well are difficult to teach in a single class and can't be reduced to simple formulas to memorize, and since many students haven't had to do that kind of work, expectations are fairly low. Expectations are especially low in English classes since most students now are barely literate. In graduate programs, the difficulty of work probably evens out.

There's also a lot of cruft in the humanities too of course. This has become the case because the people who make decisions about what to fund or promote aren't capable of the certain degree of abstract thought needed to discern what's worthwhile. But STEM has similar problems; for instance the fields of psychology, sociology, economics, and the replicability crisis in scientific publishing.

[Aquamarine]

You're going off the basis that anybody who doesn't study in STEM can't do STEM lol which isn't true

[xerx]

In undergraduate programs this is probably true. The skills necessary to conduct, say, historical research well are difficult to teach in a single class and can't be reduced to simple formulas to memorize, and since many students haven't had to do that kind of work, expectations are fairly low. Expectations are especially low in English classes since most students now are barely literate. In graduate programs, the difficulty of work probably evens out.

Yeah, I presume that advanced arts degrees are more rigorous, and that the skills to master humanities topics aren't trivial to develop (personally, I've known plenty of competent STEM-bros who couldn't analyze a poem, philosophical argument, or historical text if their lives depended on it). I was drunk-posting in the OP, in case it wasn't already obvious (flippancy can sometimes be hard to relay over the Internet).

STEM, however, isn't just about memorizing formulas. That may be somewhat true in the first (or even second) year of university, but advanced undergraduate students really do have to understand the underlying material. It means understanding how even very basic concepts (like "energy", in physics) are derived, both experimentally and a-priori (from first principles and via mathematical formalism).

But ultimately it all boils down to the student's keenness and willingness to learn. A subject — any subject — is only as rigorous as you choose to make it.

[Milo]

Once upon a girl you have to marry. Then what's the importance of that engineering degree.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Harsh but true. You're right I shoulda got my degree in something actually useful and practical but I hate str8 man engineering and logical type math and instead I got a useless liberal arts degree that real people just laugh at. I miss Coeruleum Blue and her posts though.

I'm definitely not a dumb person tho just cuz I'm not smart in the logical str8 man way. <3

[Metamorph]

Most people rejected STEM's message. They hated scientists because they hated the Monad.