From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Gregory L. Hansen)
Subject: Re: The need for a well rounded education
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:24:40 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:24:40 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test62 (21 February 1998)
In article ,
James Llort wrote:
>Another example is music. We know what sounds good. Everyone aggreed
>that Valves for instance sound great. But knowitall engineers use
>trensastors with inferious sound quality just to save a few bucks.
>They argue with numbers. Hey, I don't want to do maths just to listen
>to music. I know what I like. You cannot apply objective reasoning to
>a subject which is intristically subjective. But try telling those
>recent grads with their useless piece of paper that and they go all
Either the sound coming out of the amp is the same as the sound going into
the amp (but louder), or it isn't. Seems pretty objective to me. Your
fondness for distortion in your music may be entirely subjective, but
transistor amps have been designed that reproduce the distortion in valve
>The problem with you technical guys are that you are all so eliteist.
>Whilst you want to trun collage into a trade school with yore narrow
>minded views that collage should be a job training centre, humanities
>are focused on making you a well rounded person who is auctually
Narrow minded views like that the technical guys all sneer at the
humanities, can't appreciate music or art, force consumers to buy
transistor radios, don't appreciate life because they're too busy being
technical, and should take more humanities courses so they'd be
more like you?
>interesting to be with, not a boring focuesed geek. Really, it makes
>me so mad when people say "oh, he's doing a humanities degree, that's
>easy". I have to read *3* *books* *a* *week* on average. Not picture
>books either I assue you. It is a lot of work,
Give it a rest, we've been on both ends. Because of distribution
requirements every techie takes more humanities than humanity guys take
technical subjects. I studied German while I was getting my degree in
physics, are you studying calculus? Can you even call yourself liberally
educated if you don't have a basic understanding of math and science in
addition to the humanities and social sciences?
As for which is harder, the opinions of the freshman physics students
taking their prerequisites seems pretty clear.
>but the upshot is
>improved grammer and spelling skills that are lacking in the
You shouldn't say things like that, because it puts you in line for...
>As for those that say "you
Quoted sentences begin with a capital letter.
will be working at mcdonalds" ,
"McDonalds", it's a proper name.
>I'm going on to so a PhD in
"earn a Ph.D. in"
It's a basic rule that if you make spelling flames, you'll misspell words
in the middle of your flame.
Hope you can cope with the statistics courses and the reduction of human
behavior to numbers. You may need to learn calculus after all, since it's
the foundation for understanding and using continuous distribution
>where I'll be line for tenure
Good luck. It's not easy getting a tenured position in any field.
>where I have a much more rewarding job then beeing a science freak or
"I will have"... "than being".
Too bad we techies are so narrow-minded and can't think and act more like
>Anyways, all I have to do to be a engineer wold be to get
>my MSCE and how hard couyld that be? techincal stuff is simply
>whatever fad the market thinks is hot at the moment, but all great
>things were done by humanities.
Maxwell's equations don't count?
>You technical types are far to narrow minded and cynsical. You should
>learn to enjoy life.
That would be "far too narrow-minded and cynical". And I think life is
>Peace be to god, he transcends all.
Would Jesus go on rants that make sweeping generalizations about large
classes of people based on nothing more than some stupid stereotypes?
"A nice adaptation of conditions will make almost any hypothesis agree
with the phenomena. This will please the imagination but does not advance
our knowledge." -- J. Black, 1803.