<p>I’m glad you understand my predicament Ricrosscountry.</p>
<p>Most interesting professions, in my humble opinion, are humanities based. It’s great that some people would like to spend their lives sitting on a lab bench looking through microscopes, or wondering for years on end how to solve a rather useless equation as a pure mathematician, because our society definitely benefits from their contributions, but it’s not something I’d ever want to do.</p>
<p>@Jersey13: So you essentially just admitted that analytical thinkers have no original thought? good for you.</p>
<p><em>Detect ■■■■■■</em></p>
<p>unfortunately I have less levels in that than Kommandant Klink has in Detect Lies.</p>
<p>
[Ad</a> hominem - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary](<a href=“http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad+hominem]Ad”>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad+hominem)
*
1: appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2: marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made*
Personally, I’d love to be a pro poker player.</p>
<p>EDIT: Actually, I might make a good author too. After all, according to Ricrosscountry I am capable of “a great piece of writing.” Perhaps I should make it into a novel: The Adventures of Bart & Skip: Part I <<the great=“” tuna=“” thief=“”>></the></p>
<p>Oh god you’re slow. Let me try and explain since it’s obviously a bit hard for you to comprehend. </p>
<p>My predicament:
</p>
<p>And who might I be referring to? That should be easy enough for you to figure out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yes, that’s exactly how I feel.</p>
<p>oh shutup. that was more than unnecessary. if you had any original thought whatsoever, you would know that there is more than one way to look at an argument, statement, ect.</p>
<p>Meeooowwww</p>
<p>Okay, Ricrosscountry, can you give me an example of a great piece of creative writing?</p>
<p>Shakespeare, Fitzgerald, Hinton, Weisel. To name just a few.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In my oh so humble opinion most jobs involve doing productive things, rather than reading Shakespeare or chatting in Latin with mis amigos.</p>
<p>Because (1) the reality of the working world is definitely a matter of opinion and (2) the fact that I know absolutely nothing about what these subjects are about means I’m qualified to form such opinions.</p>
<p>amirite?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>psst, those are people</p>
<p>
Based on what standard or set of standards? Where is the brightline on greatness?</p>
<p>
What makes Shakespeare better than Twilight?</p>
<p>Shakespeare set the stage for future creative pieces of writing, as well as great theatrical productions and music.</p>
<p>Generally people who are good at math and science are also pretty good at the humanities. But people who are good are history and writing are not necessarily good or even competent in math or science.</p>
<p>Just my experience.</p>
<p>Surely not all of their works are great.</p>
<p>Just some personal perspective @JeSuis: I have tested competent in mathematics and sciences, yet nearly off the charts in the arts and english. justsayin’.</p>
<p>
That doesn’t answer my question. What makes Shakespeare’s writing better than Twilight?</p>
<p>
Lenin set the stage for Stalin and his psychopathic purges. Not all progress is good.</p>
<p>EDIT: Your logic seems a bit circular. Shakespeare was great because he set the stage for other great works, which are great because…?
And, with a sample size of n=1, the award goes to Ricrosscountry!</p>