Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Teneb]

That, Neo, is because they probably went to a shit Social Science course. Or just bought their degree.

[Sonlirain]

That, Neo, is because they probably went to a shit Social Justice course. Or just bought their degree.

FTFY

[Rolan7]

Heh I shouldn't say this but
STEM degrees are just better, sorry.
Yeah there's a need for art, but science/technology/engineering/mathematics are just more important.
Fortunately there's a shitload of people, so there's plenty of room for non-STEM degrees.

I don't even have my degree yet, I got distracted by 8 years in comp-sci which interrupted my degree.
Because STEM is THAT GOOD that I didn't need a full degree to make a living.

[ChairmanPoo]

That, Neo, is because they probably went to a shit Social Science course. Or just bought their degree.

reminds me... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebmlEGIAD78

[Orange Wizard]

That, Neo, is because they probably went to a shit Social Justice course. Or just bought their degree.

FTFY

This, really. Social science and other "soft" studies are basically pointless for 90% of people and are often pretty dumb, but it's the socjus and identity politics stuff where the actual problem is being bred. How that shit got into universities is beyond me. I'm forever thankful that NZ is relatively free from it.

[Rolan7]

Okay I believe in "social justice" to some extent.  Not 100%, but it's doing a lot to improve the US situation.
Also hurting a lot, but I think that's *mostly* dumbass teens trying to jump the ball and "help".

So yeah, non-STEM education is important.
STEM degrees are just more important right now.
US culture and upbringing is leading away from STEM, so there's a shortage.  And ideally we need a lot more STEM than non.  Creative art is important, we just don't need as much as we need creative engineering.

[Amperzand]

Or at least not as many in the field, especially since the internets allow the work of a few to be available to everybody, everywhere.

[Teneb]

Creative art is important, we just don't need as much as we need creative engineering.

Why? Also the so called "soft" sciences are not just art. Hell, social service is not about art at all. Social service is about helping people deal with shit like unemployment, education, homelessness, lack of food and so on. And unlike SJWs, they actually know what they're doing, instead of just probably making it worse.

Sure, it's important to keep going forward when it comes to tech. But it's also important to understand why and how things are happening. Not just make them happen.

[Orange Wizard]

I'd be tempted to throw psychology and more rigorous branches of sociology in with the hard sciences, honestly

[Teneb]

I'd be tempted to throw psychology and more rigorous branches of sociology in with the hard sciences, honestly

Honestly, having been on both sides (2.5 years in university for computer science before I dropped it for history (1.5 year now)) of the hard vs soft science thing? It's just plain stupid. The distinction is silly, made up by people on both sides who want to feel elitist. You ask a "soft science" scientist about people who are in the "hard" area, and they'll tell you they're all coke-snorting maniacs. You ask a "hard science" scientist about people who are in the "soft" area, and they'll tell you they're all pot-smoking hippies. They're both wrong.

Are there a lot of people in both "sides" who do drugs, both during and after university? Yeah, sure, I see a lot of them on a daily basis. They're all shitty students who will either not graduate, or just barely graduate and become shitty professionals.

All of it is science. All of it can be incredibly good, or incredibly horrible. It depends solely on the intentions of the scientist and whomever else uses the result of the research.

All of that said, fuck international relations students. Bunch of pretentious assholes.

[hops]

I think the main reason for the stigma against soft science is that we as humans prefer things of a concrete and material nature. "Physicists discover warp drive." is more exciting than "Psychologists discover a correlation between alektorophobia and hyperspace travel", even if they may end up generating the same amount of productivity and the latter will warn us of the incoming space chicken invasion.

[Neonivek]

I think the main reason for the stigma against soft science is that we as humans prefer things of a concrete and material nature. "Physicists discover warp drive." is more exciting than "Psychologists discover a correlation between alektorophobia and hyperspace travel", even if they may end up generating the same amount of productivity and the latter will warn us of the incoming space chicken invasion.

I personally think it is because non-science can just sneak its way into the soft sciences without scrutiny for years. It doesn't have the same requirements that the hard sciences have.

Hence why you can infect people with malaria and go "Yeah I think this is doing good" then win a noble peace prize. PSYCHOLOGY EVERYONE!

[Lord Shonus]

     When something reliant on a hard science turns out to be built on wrong hard science, the results are usually both obvious and spectacular - bridges fall down, space shuttles fall out of the sky, survey drones meteor into Mars, etc. Even a layman can usually tell that there's something very wrong. Softer sciences don't have that, meaning that complete garbage gets baked into both the academic and public perceptions of that field's work, and a lot of that garbage really pisses people off.

[Sonlirain]

All of that said, fuck international relations students. Bunch of pretentious assholes.

I kno rite?
On the bright side those useless fucks will never even get a job related to their degree without a healthy dose of nepotism anyway.

[Teneb]

I think the main reason for the stigma against soft science is that we as humans prefer things of a concrete and material nature. "Physicists discover warp drive." is more exciting than "Psychologists discover a correlation between alektorophobia and hyperspace travel", even if they may end up generating the same amount of productivity and the latter will warn us of the incoming space chicken invasion.

I personally think it is because non-science can just sneak its way into the soft sciences without scrutiny for years. It doesn't have the same requirements that the hard sciences have.

Hence why you can infect people with malaria and go "Yeah I think this is doing good" then win a noble peace prize. PSYCHOLOGY EVERYONE!

Nah, they can sneak into math & pals too. Human sciences have some pretty strict requirements too. Both have, when you're talking about serious institutions instead of pay for diploma "institution". Just look at the "medical researchers" who are paid by corporations to say their products are what they're not.