<p>I have heard many different things about majoring in humanities at Cal.</p>
<p>On the one hand, I have heard that I will get smaller classes (compared to science, etc.), more individualized attention, and be in less competition since the humanities are less popular at Cal.</p>
<p>But on the other hand, I have heard that the humanities at Cal aren’t so great, and I will still be in great competition with my peers as well as in huge classes.</p>
<p>So which of these 2 is true? Any help at all is appreciated! :D</p>
<p>But to answer your question, most people who think that humanities classes at Cal suck (or in general that the humanities are fundamentally easier), are avariciously depressed idiots in moolah-making majors with 3.0 GPAs.</p>
<p>So is it true that they are easier, or is that just something else that those people say?</p>
<p>And what about haveing an intimate environment? Would I have a better chance of getting that with the humanities or is it pretty much out of the question because Cal is so big?</p>
<p>Depends on the class. If you bothered to click on the link I provided, you would see the differences. For example, Sociology 1 has 280 students....whereas Arabic 1 has 22. Logically, the smaller the class, the greater the individual attention. </p>
<p>On the question difficulty, it's all relative! If you can read something and know it well, then you're set! If not, you'll have some serious studying to do.</p>
<p>How hard certain classes are is really dependent on the student. If you are more of a math guy then you will obviously do better in it. However, I wouldn't say that classes in the humanities are easier. For example, if you are taking english or history classes you will probably be reading, on average, a combined 200-250 pages of material per night. And this isn't John Grisham that you'll be reading. This is heady stuff written in middle english or diaries of revolutionary sodiers. And say you have an essay to write or a midterm to study for and you have to skip a few days of reading, well guess what? It just keeps building up, there is no downtime. So, if that seems easier to you than yes, the humanities are easier.</p>
<p>Well, conor, I've said it before, I'll say it again, it's not just about the material that is assigned. The real key is whether not doing the material has any adverse impact on your grade. That's the key.</p>
<p>The reality is that in many humanities classes, a lot of reading doesn't really matter. The truth is, a lot of students pass the class, and in some cases, get top grades, while doing very little of the assigned reading. I know one guy who took a humanities class where there were only 2 graded assignments (2 essays). You were supposed to do a huge amount of reading for these essays, but the reality is, he didn't do any of it. Instead, all he did was go to Amazon, look up all the books that he was supposed to have read, and check out the Amazon user comments of those books. Then he just rephrased those comments in his own words, and used that as his essay. He got an "A-" in the class, and the only reason he didn't get a solid A was because he never went to class (part of the class grade was based on class participation, and since he never went to class, he got a 0 on participation).</p>
<p>Now you may say that that's just one guy, but the reality is, we both know that there are plenty of humanities students who just don't do the reading, and they still pass. Hence, the point is, just looking at the assigned reading does not give you a real feel for how difficult a class is. I can assign an entire library's worth of reading to do, but if very few people do it, and I still give passing grades to everybody, even to the people who didn't do the reading, then my class is really not that hard.</p>
<p>Sakky, I don't know what classes you... oops, I mean "your friend" were taking, but they aren't the classes that I've had. Its so arrogant to assume that "we both know" something, because we both know that the vast, vast majority of humanities courses are ranked extremely high nationally and taken extremely seriously by the people who run them. Again, you seem to know every single loophole to not working for your grades, but that sure hasn't been the case with me. I'll give you and example. I had a class which basically asked you to read one book per week. I got busy with other classes and wasn't able to read more than 20% of ONE of those books (I read the rest). So we have a essay do that basically requires the knowledge that we'd gained by reading the books. I figured, "hey, I read almost everything this guy assigned except book X, I should be fine." So I right a kick-arse essay using every source but book (I even fudged a little and used a couple of book X quotes). So I get the essay back with a big C written on it and written on the very last page was "How does this gel with what book X talked about?" Now, I know that was a long and boring story, but it just illastrates the importance of keeping up in most of your classes.</p>
<p>Hm two conflicting points of view... so maybe it's just that both are the same level of difficulty, but sciences are more competitive, thus making it harder?</p>
<p>Well personally, in high school, I was very very mathematically inclined. After I got to college, I wanted to excersise my right brain more. Sure, I still did well in matrix algebra, in fact, I did the most extra credit proofs out of anyone. </p>
<p>But anyways, I think it depends more on the person. How hard you study for a certain major depends on how much you enjoy it as well. </p>
<p>And Sakky, I completely agree with her comments. Some people have to read all the readings, and some people get a lot of the material without even having to read much. This is harder to do with mathematics, unless it is more theoretical like matrix algebra instead of memorizing, like MCB.</p>
<p>"Instead, all he did was go to Amazon, look up all the books that he was supposed to have read, and check out the Amazon user comments of those books."</p>
<p>I'm quite surprised this is not considered cheating. While I can't speak for Berkeley in particular, I don't think most professors expect the students to have done all the reading. That said, most serious political science courses require students to come up with original arguments supported by textual evidence. You can't do this and get strong grades if you haven't done the reading.</p>
<p>I think that what sakky refers to does hold true in many of the "Studies" majors, where substantive thinking is rarely involved in essay writing. However, I can tell you that this is certainly not the case in philosophy classes; if you can't correctly analyze an argument, raise pertinent objections, and answer them, you will get bad grades on papers, period. And most philosophy classes have final exams, so if you don't know at least some of the material, you will not do well. We have to distinguish between fluffy humanities classes and humanities classes that do require work. </p>
<p>For further example, consider the classical languages classes. If you're not good at Greek or Latin, can't do translations, can't remember vocabulary, and can't work with the languages on-the-spot on exams, you will not do well, period. So when we have these discussions about humanities, we need to make distinctions.</p>
<p>ilikeplato, then make the distictions. If you are going to make the statement then at least finish it by saying wich are the easy majors and which are not.</p>
<p>calidan,
Why not pursue the area you are most interested in and/or enjoy the most? If you don't yet know, why not take classes in both humanities and the sciences until you have a clearer direction? I may be old-fashioned, but it seems there are so many discussions on CC on grades: how so-and-so didn't work and got good grades, what strategy to get good grades, etc. and there are very few discussions regarding learning anything. Have we created a generation of test-takers and grade wh**res? What ever happened to studying something that you are interested in and enjoy? </p>
<p>As for the number of students in classes at CAL, I think that across the board introductory courses will be large with smaller sections and more advanced classes will more likely have smaller enrollment numbers.</p>
<p>GentlemanandScholar,
All I'm trying to do is make sure that sakky isn't allowed to paint humanities with such a broad brush. He says the following: "The reality is that in many humanities classes, a lot of reading doesn't really matter. The truth is, a lot of students pass the class, and in some cases, get top grades, while doing very little of the assigned reading." I'm trying to point out that in some of the humanities departments with which I have experience, this is not true in the least. It may be true in "many" humanities classes, and I'm not afraid to say, as I already did, that the "Studies" majors are not the most academically demanding. But in many other humanities classes, sakky's complaint does not hold true.</p>
<p>Now come on, am I really painting with such a broad brush? Did I say that ALL humanities classes were easy and required little work.</p>
<p>I said it before, I'll say it again, many humanities classes are quite easy. Not all, I didn't say 'all', but I did say 'many'. I didn't want to name such classes, but looks like they have been named for me, so my exhibit one would in fact be the "Studies" classes, many of which I think we can all agree, and even a guy like conor would have to concede, really are quite easy to get a top grade without doing much work (note, I didn't say that ALL of them were like that, but I think it is indisputable that many of them are). And I would also point out that this is by no means restricted to just the "Studies" classes. Again, I don't think it's my place to name names, but I think somebody will be coming along to point out other non-Studies majors where you can skate by with very little work. </p>
<p>The general point is that, on average, technical majors, especially engineering majors, tend to be more difficult than non-technical majors. Conor, let me counter your example with a counter-example. You say that you only had time to read 20% of a book for a particular essay and you ended up with a 'C'. Well, hey, at least you passed. I know one Berkeley electrical engineering student who only had time to study about half the material covered on a particular exam - and ended up with a big fat 'F' on the exam. So here you are knowing only 20% of the material and you still pass, and this other guy who knows half of the material and fails. You tell me, where's the fairness in that?</p>
<p>And I think that really illustrates the crux of the matter. In humanities classes, and to some extent social sciences, as long as you put in a modicum of effort, you are going to pass. Maybe you won't pass with top grades (although with those 'Studies' majors, you probably will), but at least you'll pass. In technical majors, and in engineering especially, you can put in massive amounts of effort and still flunk out.</p>
<p>technical studies are more quantitative; that's all. humanites and the arts are based on critical thinking and creativity and are judged by opinion/criticism. Actually, that can be much harder to do well in. There are plenty of successful engineers, but not many successful artists. It is so not about getting good grades; it is pathetic. I think sakky has it all wrong. (and now i should get a post that states 'i said it before, i'll say it again blah blah blah')</p>