<p>I'm a history major because it's what I enjoy. Having said that, I am now taking an introductory psychology, and it is harder than I thought it would be. It is more scientific than I ever thought, and it takes up most of my studying time. Recently I did contemplate changing majors to psychology so I could become a behaviorist and work with autistic children (after doing a speech on autism I became really interested in it, anyways, enough rambling.) I have a 4.0, but that didn't come free because I'm a liberal arts major.. :P</p>
<p>For the record, "liberal arts" is basically everything but professional and trade education.</p>
<p>"academic subjects such as literature, philosophy, mathematics, and social and physical sciences as distinct from professional and technical subjects."</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You actually did not use the term "analytical reasoning" in the post to which I was responding: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thus, it was your initial use of the word "analytically" that was altogether ambiguous, because "analytical" has meaning for the disciplines of language as well as math. This ironically demonstrates your limited knowledge of the English language:</p>
<p>( TAKEN FROM THE OED: )</p>
<p>analytically, adv.
1. By analytic method or process; **by way or means of analysis*. </p>
<p>analytical, a.
1. a. Of or pertaining to analytics; employing the analytic method or process.
b. Language. Expressing the various notions and relations into which a proposition or complex notion may be analyzed, by distinct words, instead of combining several into one word
c. Math. Applied to geometry treated by means of algebra, in the Cartesian representation of curves and surfaces by equations.
*</p>
<p>Therefore, my connection between language and the words "analytically" and "analysis" is not faulty in any way, shape, or form. Your attempt to suggest that you originally used the term "analytical reasoning" is comical in a forum where everyone can actually view the original post in which you simply used the word "analytically" - it also demonstrates the unsoundness and unreliability of your argument.</p>
<p>Also, I did not "lump" english, philosophy, and history as one; I stated a common skill can be useful in each; you, however, in your statement about the "analytically impaired" literature majors, attempt to lump together all literature majors as delusional, which is hardly reasonable.</p>
<p>Dirt McGirt, as a theatre major, I feel I can address your post. I have always been one of those top-of-the-class people as far as academics goes, but there's nothing I would love to do as much as be on stage. That said, I am also going to do a minor in business, and take all the costuming classes I can. I had wanted to do a theatre/entertainment business double major, but you can't double anything with entertainment business. I know that if acting doesn't work out for me, though, I will have a backup job either working the business side of theatre, or backstage doing costuming (which is also something I enjoy). But in the meantime, I want to learn as much as I can about acting so that I can develop myself further.</p>
<p>I'm a dance major, and a theatre minor. I'm sure many people would see them as cake majors, and easy, but they're definitely full of hard work. Sure it's a different kind of work than other majors, but definitely not any easier.</p>
<p>My midterm GPA is 3.1 which I'm fairly happy about. (I'm taking my core Liberal Arts requirements), a 3.1 isn't bad considering A) Average freshman GPA here is 2.4 and B) this is based on generally 1 test, I expect to get a 3.5-3.6.</p>
<p>Edit:
Also about easy majors, I took a psychology class, because I had heard it was "easy", and was I wrong. They biological aspects of it were pretty difficult...</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't really get it when people go to college for art or acting (don't jump on me for this, I just don't understand the thought process) when, chances are, you aren't going to get a job with that degree.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hm i don't know about you, but there are alot of places that need art. Graphic design, character design, book illustration etc... everything (any product in the world) that basically requires a design. i plan on being an animator so I actually did have somewhat of a plan.</p>
<p>And there's more need for artists than there are basketball players.</p>
<p>My brother changed his major from physics to mechanical engineering because it would be more 'practical' and he absolutely hates it... (and now he can't do anything about it) so even if you are choosing something practical, make sure to choose one you like or is somewhat interested in...</p>
<p>PS so psychology is a cake major huh. Make sure you say that to them when they are getting paid 100 dollars an hour for listening to people talk. yeah.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Hm i don't know about you, but there are alot of places that need art.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you did know me, you would know that I am a place that doesn't need art. (Try writing sentences that make sense when you want to respond to someone.)</p>
<p>I understand that there is a need for some kinds of artists (graphic designers and things like that). I know people, however, that are going to school to learn how to paint and people who are going to learn how to play the violin. These aren't really practical ways to ensure that you are going to have a good job later in life. </p>
<p>My point was that college is training for a future career, so it is weird to me when people chastise others for choosing a major that guarantees a solid career. </p>
<p>
[quote]
And there's more need for artists than there are basketball players.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That doesn't change my point. No one would work at all if they didn't have to. We are all practical to some extent when we choose our majors, so don't bust people's balls for being a little more so than you are.</p>
<p>Did I EVER say that choosing a practical major was a bad thing? No. I didn't say anything about that. I was just saying there are jobs out there and not everybody who's majoring in art plans on being a painter etc. I was merely trying to point out there are jobs out there that are related to art and most people who's majoring in art is prob going for graphic/design area in general. </p>
<p>And when i said 'artists' i was talking about graphic designers/product designers (whatever designers out there) out there in the field. Seems like your definition of artist is limited to starving painters/violinist/pianist/whatever etc. Geez stop being an ass.</p>
<p>Yes, it's probably better to major in a more practical major... but what is your definition of practical? There are alot of job opportunities for me so i think that's practical enough. If one wants to be a starving painter or something of the sort, let them be. (it's not like you can change their minds) I wouldn't look down on anybody who took a more practical major however... (infact i would probably look up to them) It's just that not everybody can do that...</p>
<p>PS how does 'there ARE alot of places that need(s) art' (hm did i say I am a place that need art??) make no sense to you?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Hm i don't know about you, but there are alot of places that need art.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The sentence "Hm i don't know about you, but there are alot of places THAT I KNOW OF that need art." would have made sense. What you said didn't. I know this is me jumping on you for a stupid mistake, but if you want to make smartass remarks starting with "hm", try to make sure they are coherent.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Seems like your definition of artist is limited to starving painters/violinist/pianist/whatever etc. Geez stop being an ass.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Those were the people I was talking about. I know that there are practical artists and I acknowledged that. They are not the ones who confuse me.</p>
<p>I never stated that you said there was anything wrong with a practical major, I was explaining my point because my original post was in response to someone who did.</p>
<p>Yeah... I know several people who are violin majors/piano majors/fine art BA (just strict painting/drawing etc) but they must have some kind of plan, right? (well i hope so.) Well sooner or later they are going to be screwed but... it's their choice.</p>
<p>Alright, you CAN NOT say one field is harder than another. It's IMPOSSIBLE. Well, you can say it, but it'll be wrong.</p>
<p>I'll use an example from sports...</p>
<p>I used to both skateboard and rollerblade and people you always would hear the a$$holes of the different sports saying the other was easier. It'd usually be from the skateboarders perspective since rollerblades are attached to your feet.</p>
<p>However, the professionals at the highest levels of their respective sports all tried just as hard to master it. It's like comparing apples and oranges.</p>
<p>Say you take Michael Jordan and compare him to Tiger Woods. Both known as top players, right? Is one really easier than the other? No. Sure, someone with a knack for golf might pick it up faster, but to be good at something, it'll take equal amount of work and both will be hard. Say you think golf is easier (hey, you don't move much)... well I gaurantee you Jordan can't beat Woods in golf and I can gaurantee you that they both practiced equal amounts of times to master their sports.</p>
<p>It's the same with chemistry to engineering to english to psychology to music to whatever. You can't compare the actual subject and say it's "harder" or "easier" because it's simply not true. FOR SOME it might be harder and FOR SOME it might be easier, but that's completely subjective. And I can gaurantee you Freud or Shakespeare was just as intelligent and tried just as hard to master their crafts as Newton or some other scientist. They are completely different frikin fields of knowledge!</p>
<p>It's being completely ignorant to think something is truly harder than something else. Maybe something math-based could be harder among the American population since it seems (as someone said earlier) that they all tend to hate math and find it hard. Yet that is meaningless in defining some universe law on the matter. </p>
<p>The only thing you could say is that at SOME schools engineering or sciences are harder than english at some other school. If the requirements are easier, the teachers are more lenient, and the work load is overall less, than obviously it will be a more relaxing learnign experience. But that doesn't mean the subject is easier and it doesn't even mean the major is easier. It's just because of the school and, more importantly, the classes each of them took.</p>
<p>You could have a hell of a lot of work in an engineering class and be spending tons of time studying and working. However, there are english courses where you have to read A LOT and write A LOT and they both are going to be hard. It'll really jsut depend on who is good at what. If someone loves to read and analyze text and write, well then the english might be a breeze. If someone tends to think more mathematically and enjoys learning/studying engineering info, well then that course will be a breeze. Swap these people and guess what? They'll both do poorly most likely.</p>
<p>It's a retarded argument to make because it's really not something you can support that well.</p>
<p>You just can't compare such different things. </p>
<p>I couldn't say apples tasted better than oranges and say it was a fact, could I? Of course not! Some people like oranges more, some apples, it is all subjective... as are all these fields of knowledge. </p>
<p>So stop arguing because it's pointless.</p>
<p>You can say Engineering is harder than English, Dance, Psychology and such.</p>
<p>You just can because it is.</p>
<p>sorry double post</p>
<p>UB-Vinny... how is that?</p>
<p>Can you please explain to me how engineering is harder than dancing?</p>
<p>Ha! I'd like to see an engineering major try to become a dancer. </p>
<p>Difficulty is subjective and you can NOT be so definite when comparing completely DIFFERENT subjects. To you engineering could be harder, but there are people out there that would do better in any engineering course than they would at english, dance, and psych. </p>
<p>There is no validity behind an arguement that simply states something as fact without support, especially when it's something subjective. Difficulty differs from person to person, so there is no way you can tell me one is easier than another.</p>
<p>UB that's pretty ignorant. I bet you'd have better grades in Engineering than in English or Dance...</p>
<p>Let's make a strict definition: My theory is that difficulty in major is inversely proportional to how much sleep one gets. An engineering major with a 3.9 will get unbearably little sleep, while a dance major with a 3.9 will rest comfortably.</p>
<p>If you disagree with the implicit conclusion here, make it clear which above statement--the theory or the proposition--you deny.</p>
<p>I'm a physics major, and on Sunday through Wednesday nights, I get an unexaggerated 0 - 4 hours of sleep. I walk around like a zombie. My roommate, on the other hand, . . . well, this isn't the case for him.</p>
<p>Knavish, if you get 0-4 hours of sleep, that means that you have 6 hours of class (maybe, maybe less, maybe slightly more) and you spend 2 hours eating 3 meals.</p>
<p>So you do homework for between 12 and 16 hours a day?</p>
<p>doubtful.</p>
<p>Why do you not include Thursday nights? You never have work due on Friday?</p>
<p>I don't know why, but it seems like kids with intensive majors put most of it on themselves, this is the case at my school. It's about time management.</p>
<p>It is not doubtful. Coincidentally, I was reading this thread earlier: <a href="http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=48803%5B/url%5D">http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=48803</a>. (I did not write that post, by the way.) It is the standard.</p>
<p>Actually, I would like to revoke my last argument and instead say the following: Given a certain GPA, an engineer will need to sleep less to attain it than will a dancer. I don't want to get caught up in arguing about "difficulty." It is a futile, meaningless cause. I am a believer in satisfaction. Furthermore, my main dispute all the while has been in the normalization (the lack thereof) of GPAs across majors.</p>