<p>This is an interesting discussion. I'm pretty sure that the phenomena that you are noticing stem from the types of people which go to your respective institutions.</p>
<p>The mathematical areas will always be considered the "smarter" disciplines - the prototypical genius is the scientist. But for the bright well-rounded kids - the types that tend to go to top universities - it seems as though those with math skills tend to also possess strong writing skills, while the reverse is not necessarily true. I'm not saying that those skilled in the maths are better writers than those skilled exclusively in the humanities, but rather that they can pass as competent. This is especially true at my school: most of the native English speakers in my math class (filled with potential math and physics majors) can write well (and some exceptionally well), but I am constantly asked for help in much easier math from many of the kids in my philosophy and English classes.</p>
<p>What I'm saying is basically that math is a lot rarer of a skill than writing. Many different writing styles can be considered passable (and many exist), but math is a strict hit-or-miss discipline where you need to have a correct answer.</p>
<p>Definitely. A 3.9 is a great GPA regardless, but someone in an "easier" major (I know that the ease of a major is only based on opinion and that all majors require a lot of hard work) shouldn't talk down to someone in a "difficult" major because they have a slightly lower GPA than they do. Well...nobody should talk down to anyone, but you know what I mean.</p>
<p>Anyway, employers obviously know what GPAs are expected of their applicants, so I don't really care about having a lower GPA than someone in another major.</p>
<p>...but I definitely understand how the OP is annoyed by someone saying, "Well, I have a ::insert GPA::." I really don't think the OP has an elitist attitude or anything...they're just annoyed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What I'm saying is basically that math is a lot rarer of a skill than writing. Many different writing styles can be considered passable (and many exist), but math is a strict hit-or-miss discipline where you need to have a correct answer.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I totally agree with that statement. </p>
<p>What I do not agree with is why this thread started up by having someone think that anything but maths or science is a cakewalk? Am I inferring something incorrectly?</p>
<p>I mean, this thread could go on forever, math is harder than___ science is harder than ___ and so on and so on. I think that is a childish way of looking at your own course of study. </p>
<p>Shucks man, I am sure that a Chemistry major could totally beat my pants off in a Chemistry class. And, I am sure that I could beat a Chemistry major in most anything pertaining to Metaphysical poetry. Who cares? I never met a polymath before and doubt I ever will.</p>
<p>Your schooling, no matter what you study, is what you make of it. I try to be nice to folks, but I have never thought of anything being harder than something else and all of that. Why bother with that? Try your best and have that be all, man.</p>
<p>"Many different writing styles can be considered passable, but math is where you need to have a correct answer."</p>
<p>Yes, but there are also many writing styles that are considered unsatisfactory, and are graded subjectively by a teacher who may be a moron, while math if you get the correct answer it cannot be challenged.</p>
<p>I am not a math/science major but I consider myself good at math/science. I passed the AMC all three times I took it in high school and took Multivariable Calculus in HS and got an A in it. I also got an 800 in the MathIIC section of the SATII and a 36 on the math ACT. However, despite being able to do math, I DO NOT WISH TO PURSUE A CAREER IN MATH. Does that really make me a dumbass? I mean, engineeering/science majors always thumb their nose at non-e/s majors. It's complete b.s. </p>
<p>Btw, I believe math/science courses are EASIER than the social sciences and humanities. They have more BUSY work, yes, but when it comes time to take the test, if you're smart enough and have studied you can find the correct answer and receive full credit. On the other hand, you can write shakespeare or be a literary prodigy but if you get some lame-brained teacher or a prof who simply doesn't like your style you can get a C or worse.</p>
<p>I guess if you're an idiot the math/sciences are harder because they require you figure stuff out while the humanities/social sciences you can right some b.s. nonsense and pray. But if you consider yourself intelligent the math/sciences are truly easier. And usually teachers can catch your b.s. nonsense and will be overly critical of your flawless paper nonetheless.</p>
<p>"Engineers and scientists actually need great writing skills."
I'm sure you BELIEVE you are a great writer. Everyone does. Many engineers lack writing skills.</p>
<p>And btw what's with this "let's try to get the highest gpa with the toughest possible load" game? Yeah, why don't you triple major in elec engineering/ biochem engineering/ architecture and then go premed? guess what: NOBODY GIVES A D.AMN!!!</p>
<p>^Totally agree, peter. Math/science are usually objective, whereas social sciences and humanities are more subjective. There's only one right answer to that linear algebra problem, or finding the acceleration of the car. You could be asked to write a paper on the rationale behind the Iraq war, and it could be a totally different perspective than the professor's. If it's a good professor though, he'll grade you on your reasoning, instead of your philosophy. Does that make sense? haha What I mean is, even if the professor completely disagrees with you, but if you stated your argument and made your point, you still should do pretty well.</p>
<p>to say that there are "easy" majors is naive and plain wrong. It problem with many majors is that the people in those majors don't really enjoy them and have a passion for them. For example, I know many people studying engineer because they want a good job or they want to please their parents. Same thing with people doing premed courses. The reason why supposedly "easy" majors have high average gpa's is because the people in those majors have a passion for the subject matter and really love reading and studying the material. If you do take a profile of engineers, you'll see that the ones who have the high gpas are the ones who flat out LOVE the subject matter.</p>
<p>I'm a liberal arts student, and I actually know enough through my major that engineers are, in fact, smarter and harder working on average. Sorry, but if I was truly brilliant, why would I study economics when I spend all my time looking at labor stats. that show engineers make 3X as much as other majors, and require more inate ability than other majors? Why is there an overabundance of psych majors, and a large deficit of hard science majors? The money is there, yet people just can't hack it in the hard sciences. Again, I've read a million articles on this, just check the last issue of the economist. Talent is the most valuable commodity, and being able to read plato is not a 21st century skill, nor a particularly demanding one. BTW, my math SAT's were damn near perfect, while my verbal was only a 670, yet I still do better in liberal arts courses than math/science courses.</p>
<p>wutang, that was not my experience. It was the smattering of math, physics, chemistry, biology, etc., that let me get by in engineering; I didn't have to be an expert at any of those other things, and I couldn't have been. Engineering is integrating things from the rest of the world into useful objects, and it requires a particular way of looking at the world, without getting too deep into any one discipline, "knowing nothing about everything." Maybe those who find engineering hard would find physics or math easy; for me it was the opposite. I am blown away by physicists and doctors and many economists, but don't find myself or my fellow engineers so impressive. Different strokes! Money has only to do with supply and demand, not intelligence. Engineers are able to leverage their skills better in the current world, because many things they make are sold at a relatively high profit, sometimes at inverse value to society.</p>
<p>This is entirely based on a huge number of variables. For some people, a 3.9 in Psychology would be astonishing. For others, a 3.0 in Engineering would be fantastic.</p>
<p>As a Russian & French major with a high GPA (3.8), I constantly get comments from science/math/whatever majors, telling me that they wouldn't be able to do what I'm doing. Well, I'm just as hopeless at science & math as they are with languages. It entirely depends on the person and their strengths & weaknesses. In other words, GPA comparison is worthless, so don't bother with it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This is entirely based on a huge number of variables. For some people, a 3.9 in Psychology would be astonishing. For others, a 3.0 in Engineering would be fantastic.</p>
<p>As a Russian & French major with a high GPA (3.8), I constantly get comments from science/math/whatever majors, telling me that they wouldn't be able to do what I'm doing. Well, I'm just as hopeless at science & math as they are with languages. It entirely depends on the person and their strengths & weaknesses. In other words, GPA comparison is worthless, so don't bother with it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bollocks.</p>
<p>I'm good in math and science as well as languages. Honestly, it is MUCH harder to get good grades in math and science than languages. I hardly ever studied for Language Tests but if i did the same for Math and Science, i'd be screwed.</p>
<p>First of all, if we are trying to judge which major or majors are hard and which are easy, so whether one personally finds one subject easy or difficult doesn't really get at the point. It's only a related anecdote. </p>
<p>My second point is that, coupled with the GPA disparity between engineers and liberal arts or science and humanities or whatever one wants to label as hard and easy, a sizeable amount of this bias against the humanities, in my opinion, comes from the relative acceptance of a lack of math skills. What I mean is that it is more socially acceptable for someone to be bad at math than at reading or writing. Math is the most popular least favorite subject among students and adults when speaking of their education; that is, a plurality of Americans will list math as their least favorite subject in school. The attitude seems pretty pervasive in society, at least from what I've seen. It's more okay to say that you were bad at math in high school. Now whether this is because math is "harder" can't possibly be proved definitively, but the distaste for math and science would seem to make majors in engineering or math more rare and thus more valuable. Whether or not they actually are is debatable.</p>
<p>I know I have been guilty on occasion of belittling my own math and science skills when I am actually fairly good in each. I did very well in math and science throughout high school and college, but I've recently found myself saying with regard to finding tax and tip at restaurants or the like "Don't look at me, I'm a English major." Now I'm disgusted at myself for saying that, and I've stopped upon considering the implications, but the point is that I think sometimes humanities majors contribute to their own belittling. I know that for the math/science gen ed requirements at my school, there are the easy courses; the school's website even divides the options into "classes suggested for non-science majors" and "classes suggested for majors." One has the option between physics and "Physics for Poets." Let's not even get into how insulting that is, but it supports my claim about self-discrimination by humanities majors. Perhaps the notion so often expressed earlier on this board that humanities majors couldn't hack it in engineering classes is partly to blame on us--although that doesn't excuse engineering majors for biases. It think the opinions expressed may have evolved from this general and pervasive perception that not being good at math is okay.</p>
<p>I used to think I was good at science (did well in bio), until I went into chemistry (I realized how deluded I was)...I should have known, EVERYONE IN MY EXTENDED FAMILY failed chemistry. And in physics, my grades never reached above a B-. And this is in REGULAR HIGH SCHOOL PHYSICS. Thank god I'm applying to business school....having said that, I don't think it's acceptable for engineering/science/premed majors to belittle the liberal arts or business, but at the same time, I wouldn't last a day in a college-level chem/physics/engineering class. So whatever....I'll just get my 3.99 in finance, I mean just because my major isn't science/engineering/premed doesn't mean I'm dumb.</p>
<p>The problem I have in many math classes is that I cannot understand how learning most of the more advanced material will ever make a difference in my life. I don't gain a better understanding of the world because I know what a sin curve looks like. Most careers will also never require anything more than the basic math skills so what's the point? </p>
<p>I won't argue that an engineer is more likely to get an A in an english class than vice versa, but writing is a skill used by everyone, even engineers, while engineering is <em>only</em> used by engineers.</p>
<p>My opinion is that people should do what they love and not degrade others for following their passions. If you think about it, most science/math majors would make terrible elementary school teachers; not that they wouldn't be able to do it, but they would really hate keeping little first graders in their seats during reading time.</p>
<p>Obviously the original post over-generalized, but at some schools there are in fact, certain majors that take less work to get good grades in than other majors. There seems to be a trend that engineering majors are in general, graded harsher, while SOME majors (it may vary from college to college) in the liberal arts, are graded easier. Of course, in some places the opposite may be true, or they could be of the same difficulty, but in many places what the OP said holds a certain shade of truth.</p>