<p>Traditionally or historically, MIT grads are math/physics oriented, even if they don’t pursue math/physics at MIT. However, there are people (and moreso recently) who are not into math, despite strong stats in that area. MollieB obviously enjoyed her time at MIT, and I get the impression she didn’t really enjoy math/physics. I know someone who took all their language classes at Harvard because it was more rigorous, so that is possible if you feel that strongly about that particular area. I’m sure the language classes are good at MIT, though. And there are good classes and star profs in other areas. Economics is arguably the #1 dept. in the world, but I don’t feel it’s a good choice for someone who doesn’t like math or physics (especially at MIT.) </p>
<p>You really need to explain what you mean by the statement, “it appears you need to be necessarily math/physics oriented to even consider this school.” Be more specific. And also, what interests you in MIT and how you would like to distribute your time during your undergrad years. So far you have said you would like to take comp science classes even if you don’t major in it, so that is one reason to attend MIT.</p>
This impression is correct. I mean, I didn’t grit my teeth all the way through either requirement (I particularly enjoyed E&M and multivariable calc), and I certainly appreciate having learned the material, but I wouldn’t have taken them if I hadn’t been required to do so.</p>
<p>I think it’s important to ask whether you really dislike math and physics, or whether you just don’t enjoy them enough to take more classes than required. The latter is perfectly acceptable for an MIT student – after all, we don’t all end up as math and physics majors, and that’s not by chance – but the former is more worrisome.</p>
<p>One thing to consider that hasn’t been pointed out yet is that the computer science degree at MIT requires one to like math and physics since you have to take EE classes as part of the core. Math for comp sci (18C) is usually the alternative for people who want to avoid the EE part; this obviously isn’t a possibility for someone who doesn’t like math.
You could construct your own curriculum, taking C.S. classes with a humanities major. Also, you could be a cognitive science major. I think intro to comp sci. (6.001) and artificial intelligence (6.034) count toward the cognitive science major. You could take the software lab to fulfill the institute lab requirement. If you like bio too, this could be a good choice of a major as it is a quasi-humanities subject.</p>
<p>Your information is outdated - the curriculum was redone for 2011s and beyond. The only EE content I had to learn for my CS degree was in 6.01 and 6.02, the two intro survey classes. 6.001 no longer exists. That being said, CS is heavy in theoretical math, so you will need to be comfortable with writing proofs. Computer science is actually shockingly different from software engineering, so if you just want to code, you’re going to be disappointed with most CS programs.</p>
<p>Thank you for all the contributions. I should reasure here that it is not that I hate math or physics. It is just that instead of spending hours trying to demonstrate a theorem, I’d rather be doing something else. My biggest concern is chemistry, which I really dislike.
I enjoy the beauty of a math demonstration and like to go through my math lectures. It is just that I think I will never be a math genious and should not spend too much time on it.
As far as CS is concerned, I do not want to stay confined to just coding: I want the bigger picture. I also like the “operational” part of math such as linear programming which I studied on my own and used in one of my software project. So, as far as math requirements for CS, I should be fine. So, to summarize, my dream would be to have the opportunity to work on CS, human and machine languages and have time to study history and economics to better understand our world. Can I do that at MIT?
by the way, what is EE? (sorry for the ignorance)</p>
<p>If you can stick through one chemistry class, I think you’ll be fine. I also heavily suggest looking at 18C (math w/ computer science). There’s certainly nothing stopping you from taking classes in all of the above.</p>
<p>I’m going to say again what’s been said - CS is not the same as software engineering. You can probably focus on what you want to do, but if you’re not generally curious about the area, and are only curious about the humanities, then I’d say there are so many other schools out there that you could consider instead. If it’s a question of “bearing math/science requirements” to access a humanities program which is good, but with little other appeal, forget it.</p>
<p>The real question is what this school offers you that others don’t, and perhaps I missed it, but I haven’t seen enough of a focus on this in your questions.</p>
<p>Basically, I think it’s been beaten to death that you’re not going to die because you have to take a few general math/science requirements. But the story just barely begins there…</p>
<p>Basically, look at the curriculum. Go check out the catalog in majors you’re interested in (here’s the one for EECS - [MIT</a> Course Catalog: Course 6-1, 6-2, 6-3](<a href=“Welcome! < MIT”>Welcome! < MIT)), find things on OpenCourseWare, and ask us for advice ^_^</p>
<p>Could it be that you’ve not had good teachers in chemistry? My son dislikes both biology and chemistry (and loves math and physics) and has very little experience with CS but he’s hoping to learn to tolerate them in college by having excellent professors and classmates that can energize him. </p>
<p>He visited MIT recently through a special program and <em>loved</em> his time there. For him, it was the people that nailed it for him.</p>
<p>Would it hurt you to apply? Do you have the $60 for the app fee? Apply and then visit if accepted.</p>
I mean, I didn’t grit my teeth all the way through either requirement (I particularly enjoyed E&M and multivariable calc), and I certainly appreciate having learned the material, but I wouldn’t have taken them if I hadn’t been required to do so.</p>