Redditors opinions:
i don't think it's really a 'smarter than' thing, both classes of subjects have fundamentally different structures and rules, and people are gonna be tuned more at some rather than others, though there is no reason (really) that one can't be good at both. i reckon math and structural thinking are probably harder to compensate for than English/history. my brain is a bit autistic, i only think in words or symbols when necessary, and the areas i am the worst at are textual facts (in other words, i am SHIT at subjects like history). they simply do not really record in my mind at all, and to the extent that they do it is because the facts have some kind of structural logic. otoh, i've spent most of my professional life as a freelance writer, and write things okay enough. proofwriting is much more fun, though, and i suspect if i decided to waste time in college after high school, it would have been learning mathematics (or paleoanthropology). also all sociologists are faggots
It doesn't really work like that. There is only general intelligence. If you excelled at anything in school, you probably have good enough general intelligence to learn anything. I was top of my class in English in high school, but transitioned into STEM later. It really comes down to interest and learning new ways of thinking, which people with low general intelligence cannot do so well.
>>16892944His idea of an intelligent person, no doubt influenced by his brothers, is that of an autistic guy hyperfocused on maths.A truly intelligent man would be mathematical and scientific, while being able to grasp more nuance than the midwit.
>>16892942stem attracts intelligence, intelligent people like making things not writing bullshit essays or blogposts
>>16892944He's right except for his mischaracterization of mathematically-minded people. People who are good at math tend to be linguistically talented and creative. What he refers to are just nerds who aren't good at anything besides memorization and following rules, which is a decent characterization of most scientists but not mathematicians.
>>16892942Actually if you ask an engineer-brained STEM autist to engage with a book's themes at a college level they completely fail and just become dismissive and pretend literature is beneath their intelligence as a way of coping.
>>16892942Why does the word hate need to be censored now?
>>16892942Podiatry is STEM.Philosophy is not.If that doesn't answer your question you're probably a podiatrist.
"A math student who speaks english can pick up a english book and read it, understand it"The math student in question:
Most "STEM" people are engineers, nurses, and codemonkeys, and plenty of them are retarded, so probably not
>>16893312At least they can represent their shit takes as a nice Venn diagram!
>>16893312You mean the math student is right?People who think there's meaning and symbolism behind everything don't understand the artistic process at all.
>>16892942>Are STEM students smarter than humanities?I actually used to think STEM = smart, but in the recent decade or so, I think stem students, but really most of the students are lacking basic coherent reading abilities. Inability to read the whole sentences, inability to take in cues, inability to compress ideas and expand ideas, inability to extrapolate beyond the initial idea within the set context, inability to understand the contextual limits, etc. Humanities, or at very least, philosophy department or the other more rigorous subjects like linguistics might help many people understand the limits of thought properly. I attribute the decline of coherent/testable science to declining standards partially to this.
>>16892942There are productive sciences and there's occupational therapy for upper-middle-class retards
>>16893552When Jerry O'Connell was in film school, he embarrassed one of his professors that was trying to push a bunch of symbolism in 'Stand By Me'. O'Connell was one of the stars of the movie and simply said "I was there the whole time and never once did I hear director Rob Reiner or anyone else reference a 'Christ figure'". The professor dismissed O'Connell comments as him having been too young while acting in the movie to understand what it was about.
>>16893552You are a Math student it seems (you will again prove it by re-stating something that no one claimed - namely that everything has symbolism and obscure meaning).
>>16893552M8 it's pretty much the literary equivalent of this
>>16893571>I was there the whole time and never once did I hear director Rob Reiner or anyone else reference a 'Christ figure'Yeah and neither did Paul Verhoeven on the set of Robocop, I bet. He just fucking shot the film that way. As if a film director is going to be like "okay everyone, gather round, you see that detail over there I had the set designers put in? Well when the camera zooms in on it to frame it a certain way and we edit it in the right place it's going to be really allegorical, so I want you to act like it!"
>>16892942The average maths/physics student is probably smarter than the average history/english student just because it's more rigorous and objective.You can get away with a lot with the latter and the professors probably get 1000 grading petitions and complaints a semester because their students are whiny retards that can afford to get a meme degree because they always have their parents as backup.I don't doubt that there's incredibly smart outliers in either profession tho however one of then is much more likely to end up teaching in an elementary scool and arguably nothing exciting in life due to the profession and their wage.
>>16893722>arguably nothing exciting in life due to the profession and their wage.Also why would you consciously opt for this life if you were "intelligent"? All it does is ensure you end up with no/low quality women and retire when you can't walk.
>>16892977There are certain rhetorical tools like nuance and irony that, when placed in the hands of an idiot redditor, lose all value and in fact do more to impede communication more than to facilitate it.The problem is mass literacy. You have tons of reddit morons who never should have been taught how to read and mistake their own semi-literacy for intelligence. The only reason these people were taught any literacy at all is so they could serve as wage slaves in an industrialized society, then they start receiving all these opinions online and think they are enlightened. It's a joke.Literacy is not benign, it's like a club that has to be gatekept and guarded with care, lest it be overrun with idiots who pollute the pool of written language, which in a functional society would constitute something akin to a collective great work.
>>16893793Why respond to my post when you are just writing something completely unrelated?
No, nobody with any intellect would pursue a career in STEM
>>16893579But this meme has a point - it's called "over-abstraction".
>>16893312I am here to tell you that most English literature is dissected by people that barely speak the language
>>16893729Unlike STEM graduates huh lol
>>16893554One of the things that shocked and horrified me in university was seeing my friend taking doing a business degree take a basic logic test. I was astounded to realize he did not understand basic logic. One a similar level, if humanities folks cannot pass basic logic tests, I have sincere doubts they are capable of the reasoning skills you are outlining in your post. Their thinking must instead be riddled with logical errors, which they mistake as "poetic genius".
>>16893985I had a required logic course in my humanities programme. I can understand why you don't need it for a business degree though.
>>16892977This. Most people don't know how to characterize mathematicians because they don't know what mathematics is. They equate mathematics with computation.
>>16894006>I had a required logic course in my humanities programme. So did my friend.And what I'm telling you is that the level of logical intelligence possessed by people in non-STEM fields is shockingly low when viewed by a STEM person.It is low enough that most STEM people are shocked and amazed that the common man makes enormous logical errors in their thinking all the time and is just blatantly unaware of it.
>>16894006>>16893985I wrote "logic test", rather than "logic course".It was a logic problem set within the context of a logic course.>>16894006>I can understand why you don't need it for a business degree though.Yeah but the point is non-STEM degrees have to take an entire course on logic and still do terribly badly at it, when STEM people are wading in those waters every day and its just totally assumed you understand it or you wouldn't be able to do any problem solving in STEM.
>>16893931Stem grads actually make money which is the best indicator of being able to find a woman.
>>16893985>>16894010>>16894013You seem confused. Scientists and engineers don't usually take any courses in logic, and they tend to be just as hopeless as any humanities major. The way they operate is to memorize how a problem is done, and then repeat what they recall. If faced with a new or different problem, they either have an emotional breakdown and/or just pretend the problem is something they've seen before even though it's completely different to what was stated. There's no actual thought process they follow; it's just memorize, regurgitate, and hope for the best.>t. math lecturer who constantly has to deal with the logical ineptitude of science and engineering majors.
>>16894036>courses in logicYou realize in the domain of non-STEM this refers to "logic puzzles" to teach basic logic and reasoning skills. > If faced with a new or different problem, they either have an emotional breakdownDude this is a strawman. Engineers are taught to solve problems.They become "design engineers", which is also all about problem solving. Why do I suspect you are that same humanities major rather than a real math lecturer. A "math lecturer" who lectures engineers, scientists, but finds humanities students the most gifted of all?
>>16892942Maybe at raw IQ level, but you really come off as a retard/uncultured if all you can really talk about in depth is STEM. I guess know something past surface level that isn't STEM.
>>16892942This doesn't deserve a thread. A simple search "average iq by major" will give you the answer you're looking for.Or not, since you're just here to troll. >>16892944Critical thinking as a general skill is hard to gauge. People may have developed critical thinking for certain topics, but not for other topics.Trying to guess someone's general skill seems like power-wanking to me.>>16893312The person who made that image seems oblivious to the creation process of novels.Authors iterate on their work like how a painter iterates on a sketch. Everything starts becoming deliberate until all that is unnecessary has been modified or removed.In fictional literature, every piece of detail is supposed to convey a certain symbol, mood or feeling. Every noun, verb and adjective is packed with meaning. When it isn't, then the absence of meaning can be considered a literary device by itself.>>16893552Obviously, the author did not intend for his sentences to be scrutinized and given more emphasis than intended by a literature teacher.That image in your head is likely muddying your perspective on this topic. Not to mention, the actual intent of the author is not very relevant, either way.Works of art are always open for interpretation, unless the author provides commentary for every single word and meta choice they've made. Even in that hypothetical instance, it can be argued that the author's commentary ought not to influence how one should interface with their work, since ultimately, it's a personal decision to trust the author over anyone else to know how to enjoy a piece of art.
>>16894040If you are going to quote my post, try actually responding to it, rather than senselessly rambling.
>>16892942Of course STEM is smarter than humanities. This is because humanities are an inherently political field. There's no empirical way to determine which answer is right, so the only way of gaining prominence in the humanities is by having political influence. That's why they only produce cunning politicians instead of smart scientists.
posting in a trash threadhttps://discord.gg/EMq43xYNxq
>>16894010Hell, I'm shocked and amazed that the average /sci/autist makes enormous logical errors in their thinking all the time and is just blatantly unaware of it.
>>16894046>A simple search "average iq by major" will give you the answer you're looking for.No, that is simply restating the issue.
>>16894139>There's no empirical way to determine which answer is right, so the only way of gaining prominence in the humanities is by having political influenceNo, rather it's to make logical arguments.
>>16894166Logic can't determine the right answer. It can only tell you what you get from axioms. If that's the only thing you care about like in math then it's fine but if you want to get to the right answer, it's not enough.
>>16894139>Of course STEM is smarter than humanitiesThe separation drawn between the two, in general but especially the way you do it in your post, is something only midwit academic wagies believe in and they tend to be the STEM ones.
>>16894211This is exactly the kind of politics I'm talking about. You have no argument, so you resort to sneering and adhominem, a common pastime of humanities majors.
>>16894192Logic will always generate a right answer from the right assumptionsOf course in humanities there's never going to be "a" right answer
>>16894164False. For instance there are no logical errors in this reply
>>16894234>This is exactly the kind of politics I'm talking about.>politicsOk, I assumed you're a regular midwit but you're actually below 10th grade reading level.
>>16894238Which is why it is dominated by politics, since coming up with logical arguments for anything you want is trivial.
>>16894244>coming up with logical arguments for anything you want is trivial.Then how come you repeatedly fail to come up with a logical argument for your retarded beliefs?
>>16892958Is there though? I lived 4 years in a PhD student dorm and holy fuck most of the people I knew were complete and utter brainlets outside of the subject they were studying. Like, actual childlike naivete about reality or basic logic or common sense in regards to lots of just normal real world stuff.
>>16892944Based Nuancechads
>>16892958>It doesn't really work like that. There is only general intelligence. If you excelled at anything in school, you probably have good enough general intelligence to learn anything.This is not quite true, unless you define "general intelligence" in some truly general way that standardized testing fails to pick up on. I find time and time again that STEMcels lack in metacognition and I occasionally regret not going for the Humanities instead.
>>16894256There's a lot of truth to this. When I was a sophomore, I had a friend of a friend who was a junior in Applied Physics and was pretty advanced, he was in the graduate level Mathematical Physics class. My car died and while we were jumping it, he kept insisting one of the cars had to be running or it wouldn't work, and was shocked when we jumped it like that. Brilliant in the classroom but a dud outside of it.
>>16894239Lol yes there are. My claim was not universal so a single counterexample disproves nothing. And that means that your reply is actually corroborating evidence.
>>16894234That's rhetoric bruh, not politics.
I've spent my life mingling with people of all backgrounds. One thing I've learned the hard way is that pure mathematicians are the only people on Earth who deserve the adjective 'smart'.
Can't speak to how things are now but when I was at university, there were people in most majors who were highly intelligent. The big difference was the bottom dwellers. They couldn't make it in STEM majors. Same for the "smart but lazy" types. Smart and ambitious can do well in theater or engineering. Middling or lazy can sleepwalk through theater but quickly fail out of engineering.
>>16894394Nowadays, the overbearing administration of universities allows the middling and lazy to get through engineering and science.
>>16894395I hope you're wrong but am afraid you're correct.
>>16894284If both are kind of discharged like one being really low and the other being borderline what's necessary to turn on the car it wont work. The car being on provides a steady voltage.
>>16894326You are a retard
>>16894292Even the AI disagrees with you (inb4 humanities majors start crying about AI).>Yes, rhetoric is fundamentally political because it's the art of persuasion used to influence public opinion, shape society, and enact change
>16894536Giving India access to the internet was a mistake.
>>16894504Are you saying he's bad at math
>16894539Your dishonesty has been thoroughly exposed.
Does anybody seriously think humanities majors are on average smarter than STEM students?
>>16894543They're about equal.
>>16894536>Even the AI disagrees with youLOL
>>16894543After this thread I'm absolutely convinced the Humanities have the STEMcels thoroughly beat
>>16894545>>16894646I can maybe see a world where niche humanities majors might be as smart as some lower STEM fields, but you will never convince me the average psychology major is as smart as the average physicist.
>>16894543You can tell how dead this board has become by noticing how many humanities supporters there are itt. There are practically no /sci/entists left on this board anymore.
>>16892942Eh, ye olde English literature can be a cunt to read.But I'm willing to bet that any university math student with basic googling stills can figure out what tf the author was trying to say within a month or two, assuming he's willing to dedicate himself to it.By comparison the literature specialist might never be able to understand complex formulas cause it's just too much for his puny brain. Most people are simply incapable of learning university level math, physics or programming.
>>16894701I agree.
>>16894701>He thinks the greatest challenge of reading medieval literature is deciphering the straightforward denotation of wordsYou don't even know what you don't know. I think many of the world's troubles come from ostensibly "smart" people thinking that if they're smart it means they automatically understand everything.
>>16894036They have narrow domain specific logic they learn, but beyond that it seems vast majority of people are not able to generalize logic and reasoning systems coherently. We have the infamous thundernigger skeptic guy who is supposedly a chemistry graduate at some random european university, but his reasoning skills is so shoddy and his inability to understand nuances so broken that it almost feels like the guy isn't operating logic/reasoning but rather on whimsical beliefs and using shoddy reasoning systems to bend the results to his view. I think the only discourse where you can generalize coherently is probably either something very deep and abstract like hard abstract math where you are not just exploring the limits of math but also have deep branching knowledge of the entire math field or rigorous philosophy that specifically branch out to explore many possible ends of reasoning treebranch, this covers most of the possible thought modes that people have come up with over the thousands of years. And really, I think the only hope for humans to get smart is someone who has deep expertise at the edge of knowledge with the ability to cover the entire system from scratch with minimal apparent axioms, aka the ability to network complex domains accurately
>>16894036Yet, these so called logically inept scientists and engineers managed to create a computer for you to post this retarded complaint on. Mathtards don't seem to realize they are not nearly as smart as they think they are for being trained to juggle symbols on a paper. Basically, touch grass.
>>16894036Rote memorization alone is an issue that touches all fields of knowledge, including STEM and Humanities. It's also an inefficient way to learn. To go back to the thread's subject, it's better to not only seek to learn something but to understand it. Abstract thinking is important (and convenient) for both STEM and Humanities for example. It's also good for critical thinking and meta-cognition but unfortunately the education system still produces a lot of trained drones, whether it is in STEM or Humanities
>>16892942Whenever I debated about politics with stem students (mostly coders), their opinions were utterly retarded. But imo their retarded opinions were mainly a result of arrogance, not stupidity. >I'm a compsci major and I make lots of money, that means I'm superior and good at everything. >My opinions on economics are objectively true because I'm superior, even though I don't actually know anything about economics
Comp sci degree via an apprenticeship.Did all the flooring, wiring and joinery work in my house while also working from home.Can take a manual and learn how to do most skills quite fast.Met alot of humanities fags that end up as process people or HR.I'd be far more effective doing their job as they would mine.People who do humanities are just wastes of space.Who the fuck cares about your book long master about the Lesbian identities at borders of Peru.Humanities people also carry a fuck ton of student debt they can't pay back that becomes a burden when you marry them.
>>16893554you are confusing autism with intelligence. The problem is autist can make STEM people look like speds because their fixations with rules and fixations on topics can allow them to punch above their weight and mime being 120+ on pure output of rigid formulas but they add nothing to the field and just end up research assistants and lab monkeys
>>16895035>you are confusing autism with intelligence.Many STEM autists do
>>16894845Whenever I see someone post a n=1 based on their personal experiences, filtered through their personal lens, on a science board, it reminds me of just how little people who claim to love science actually understand it.
>>16895398>Whenever I see someone post a n=1 based on their personal experiences, filtered through their personal lens, on a science board...You mean exactly what you've done in your post?
>>16892942Not in money and status, I end up wagie stock owner
