<p>
Yours, anyway.
You said, earlier in the thread, that humanities requires regurgitation (memorization), while sciences require conceptualization and are harder to absorb. It was a laughable statement, it’s what led me to take a more pro-humanities stance whereas beforehand I was saying what could be considered common knowledge (that it depends on each teacher, each department, each student). I even generally agree with the assumption that most if not all science fields of study in academia are on average more difficult than their counterparts in the humanities (and the social sciences), with philosophy and a more quantitative economics program possibly being the exceptions. But I was prompted to argue against you, and the culture of “science is hard humanities are for people who don’t know what they’re doing,” even though I don’t really have a dog in this race (I have experience in computer science and math, but my primary focus is economics, a social science). You’ve totally changed what you initially said, and what you recalled was a story of a bad class, and you applied it to every experience everyone has or will ever had. It’s stupid.</p>
<p>Since I know your reality, I’ll share with you mine. You applied a solitary experience and the opinions of some guys you know to the entirety of the human experience, and that invalidates most of the views you may or may not hold.
I see those humanities courses really did little for you. We’re talking about disciplines within the whole, not the whole. I try to be specific whenever I can, although it’s certainly not something I do often. I did it there, however.
Terrific.</p>