RE: Bachelor of science or arts?

RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

provfivetine -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 1:39:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl Today's college students are often advised to stay away from BA degrees. They are told that graduates with BA's are flipping burgers while those with Bachelor of Science degrees have great careers. A Bachelor of Science requires students to pass more science courses and a Bachelor of Arts requires several foreign language courses. Therefore, all Bachelor of Arts graduates are bilingual. I've lost count of the number of help wanted ads I've read stating bilingual is preferred or required. None of these ads were for restaraunt workers. So why are so many BA's flipping burgers if being bilingual is so important? Why are graduates with BS degrees that don't require foreign languages more successful than bilingual BA graduates? I'm not sure that BA's require a foreign language. That's news to me. Perhaps, many programs that issue a BA require 2 years or so of a foreign language to gain acceptance, but it doesn't seem to be too common to be mandated in the curriculum - at least from my experience. Quite simply, the reason that the BA degree is losing value is because so many kids are obtaining it. Value is derived from scarcity. We don't need any more students graduating from the fields of the social sciences; we need more natural science majors (scientists, engineers, etc.) Kids are often pressured to go to school, and they aren't mature enough at 17/18/19 years old to understand that going tens of thousands, or in some extreme cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars, into debt for a BA is a bad situation. Many would rather study the social sciences because it's a much easier field to study than the natural sciences. The liberal arts schools often churn out card carrying communists by the time that they're through with school, since the social science departments are all bastions of cultural marxism - so they're even more confused upon graduation than they were going into school. Additionally, to utilize a BA in your field of, say, history or sociology you often need a PhD. No one really cares that people have a bachelors degree in the liberal arts, because there's not much you can do in your field with it. There's a reason that so many kids with liberal arts degrees end up "flipping burgers" as you say. They have no marketable skills and aren't qualified to teach or get a job doing research, which is about all you can do with a social science major. And you'll need that PhD for those positions. On the flip side, a bachelors in, say, aerospace, chemical, mechanical engineering - even if it's from a less than stellar institution - will likely get you a good paying job. I would argue that a BS from a "B" institution is, ceteris paribus, more valuable than a BA from an "A" institution. Just like a high school diploma actually meant something back in the 50's and 60's, so too did a bachelors of arts actually mean something in the 70's, 80's and 90's, but now that so many people have these degrees, they are less valuable. To stand out now a days, you need a masters or professional degree.

DarkSteven -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 2:18:06 PM)
DBG, your career will not be determined as much by what your degree is, as much as what field it's in. Take an aptitude test and see what you'd like to do. Are what careers would mesh with that. Then figure out what degrees would get you into the field, and if you need anything else, such as an internship, to enter the field. nd what salaries are like, as well as likelihood of placement in the field. And forget about the language requirement. That's usually Spanish and there are so many jobhunters that are fluent in it, that it's not really a key to a good career.

thompsonx -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 2:32:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl Today's college students are often advised to stay away from BA degrees. They are told that graduates with BA's are flipping burgers while those with Bachelor of Science degrees have great careers. A Bachelor of Science requires students to pass more science courses and a Bachelor of Arts requires several foreign language courses. Therefore, all Bachelor of Arts graduates are bilingual. I've lost count of the number of help wanted ads I've read stating bilingual is preferred or required. None of these ads were for restaraunt workers. So why are so many BA's flipping burgers if being bilingual is so important? Why are graduates with BS degrees that don't require foreign languages more successful than bilingual BA graduates? My Bachelor of Science program required a foreign language. The difference between BA and BS programs is that a BS program requires more focused study, either the student mus choose a minor or at least take additional courses in the major. If you want to make money go to trade school. If you wish to become educated then go to college. In general BS degrees is taken to mean someone who applied themselves in college while a BA degree is viewed as someone who mostly took electives and did the minimum work needed for a degree. What a crock of shit

thompsonx -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 2:33:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy FR There are many schools with basketweaving electives in a B. Science curriculum. Is it your point that basket weaving should not be taught in college?

thompsonx -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 2:47:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine I'm not sure that BA's require a foreign language. That's news to me. Perhaps, many programs that issue a BA require 2 years or so of a foreign language to gain acceptance, but it doesn't seem to be too common to be mandated in the curriculum - at least from my experience. Perhaps you need a little more experience? Quite simply, the reason that the BA degree is losing value is because so many kids are obtaining it. Value is derived from scarcity. So if they all start getting bs degrees those too will loose their value? We don't need any more students graduating from the fields of the social sciences; we need more natural science majors (scientists, engineers, etc.) Why? Kids are often pressured to go to school, and they aren't mature enough at 17/18/19 years old They can join the military at those ages. Should that be changed to relfect their lack of maturity? to understand that going tens of thousands, or in some extreme cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars, into debt for a BA is a bad situation. Many would rather study the social sciences because it's a much easier field to study than the natural sciences. Do you have any proof of this or is this just your uneducated opinion? The liberal arts schools often churn out card carrying communists by the time that they're through with school, Do you have any proof of this or is this some more of your uneducated mindless rhetoric? since the social science departments are all bastions of cultural marxism How about a little validation of your bullshit opinions. - so they're even more confused upon graduation than they were going into school. You seem to be the only one who is confused. Additionally, to utilize a BA in your field of, say, history or sociology you often need a PhD. No one really cares that people have a bachelors degree in the liberal arts, because there's not much you can do in your field with it. There's a reason that so many kids with liberal arts degrees end up "flipping burgers" as you say. They have no marketable skills and aren't qualified to teach or get a job doing research, which is about all you can do with a social science major. And you'll need that PhD for those positions. Since when does one need a phd to teach school. All one needs is a bachelors degree and a teaching certificate. On the flip side, a bachelors in, say, aerospace, chemical, mechanical engineering - even if it's from a less than stellar institution - will likely get you a good paying job. I would argue that a BS from a "B" institution is, ceteris paribus, more valuable than a BA from an "A" institution. Just like a high school diploma actually meant something back in the 50's and 60's, so too did a bachelors of arts actually mean something in the 70's, 80's and 90's, but now that so many people have these degrees, they are less valuable. To stand out now a days, you need a masters or professional degree. Do you only open your mouth to change feet?

provfivetine -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 3:41:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Perhaps you need a little more experience? Go find me a few programs that require foreign language as part of their curriculums and I'll retract my statement. Until then, your suffering from the same problem that you accuse me of. I'm sure you can google this and find a couple, but I'm unaware of this at a large-scale level. quote: So if they all start getting bs degrees those too will loose their value? Yes. quote: Why? We need more production that comes from these fields if we want to maintain high standards of excellence in the sciences. Many of the natural science majors that come here are foreigners. Not that there's anything wrong with this, but Americans are falling behind in the sciences and technical fields. If the US and it's populace wants to keep up with the surge of productivity in India and China, then this will require an educated populace to carry it out. quote: They can join the military at those ages. Should that be changed to relfect their lack of maturity? Sure they can, but you're not understanding my point. Kids at that age don't understand the implications of massive debt. quote: Do you have any proof of this or is this just your uneducated opinion? Sure. Here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. Uneducated opinion? You're a joke. Regarding this point, I own you like a piece of property. quote: Do you have any proof of this or is this some more of your uneducated mindless rhetoric? How about a little validation of your bullshit opinions. Have you talked to any social science graduates? Are you honestly under the impression that the social science department at the universities aren't filled with cultural marxists? What a ridiculous thing to argue against. See: This, this, this, and this. quote: You seem to be the only one who is confused. Good argument. Provide empirical evidence to the contrary to show this. Until then, you suffer from the charges that you level against me. quote: Since when does one need a phd to teach school. All one needs is a bachelors degree and a teaching certificate. Sure, if you want to teach at the primary level, then maybe. There's huge competition for this though. Many teachers now-a-days, even at this level, are expected to have masters degrees. Again, this wasn't always the case, but with the over-supply of BA's it now is. You're terrible at arguing. You provide no evidence or argumentation to substantiate your claims, yet you accuse me of this. Everything you said was just an assertion with out an argument. Amazing. Using a self-referendum against you takes care of everything. Is everything that you accuse me of just your uneducated opinion? I think you're the one that's confused.

Aneirin -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 4:12:59 PM)
I am currently engaged in studying for a BA, my final year is next year, and nowhere on the course is the requirement to learn another language. But I am at the point where I question finishing my degree, as at the age I am now, who is going to employ me and added to that I don't want to work for anyone else other than myself, so is a BA that necessary, I personally doubt it. BA, BSc and all that is only of use if you wish to be emloyed by others as in my field of expertise, customers do not ask if the creator is qualified to create and sell, they either like the produce or not and if they like it, they may buy it and that, is the end result, qualified or not.

thompsonx -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 4:28:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Perhaps you need a little more experience? Go find me a few programs that require foreign language as part of their curriculums and I'll retract my statement. Until then, your suffering from the same problem that you accuse me of. I'm sure you can google this and find a couple, but I'm unaware of this at a large-scale level. OK http://collegeapps.about.com/od/theartofgettingaccepted/a/ForeignLanguage.htm quote: So if they all start getting bs degrees those too will loose their value? Yes. quote: Why? We need more production that comes from these fields if we want to maintain high standards of excellence in the sciences. Many of the natural science majors that come here are foreigners. Not that there's anything wrong with this, but Americans are falling behind in the sciences and technical fields. If the US and it's populace wants to keep up with the surge of productivity in India and China, then this will require an educated populace to carry it out. I asked why the value of those science degrees would fall...the above does not answer anything. quote: They can join the military at those ages. Should that be changed to relfect their lack of maturity? Sure they can, but you're not understanding my point. Kids at that age don't understand the implications of massive debt. But you feel that they understand the implications of joining the army ie: death or dismemberment etc.? quote: Do you have any proof of this or is this just your uneducated opinion? Sure. Here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. Hmmm. let's try this again shall we? Kids are often pressured to go to school, and they aren't mature enough at 17/18/19 years old to understand that going tens of thousands, or in some extreme cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars, into debt for a BA is a bad situation. Many would rather study the social sciences because it's a much easier field to study than the natural sciences. That students go into debt for an education is hardly in question. The moronic uneducated statement of yours that I asked you to back up was your premis that social sciences are an easier field than the natural sciences. Uneducated opinion? You're a joke. Regarding this point, I own you like a piece of property. quote: Do you have any proof of this or is this some more of your uneducated mindless rhetoric? How about a little validation of your bullshit opinions. Have you talked to any social science graduates? Are you honestly under the impression that the social science department at the universities aren't filled with cultural marxists? What a ridiculous thing to argue against. See: This, this, this, and this. The bias in the jesus links you posted is pretty obvious. You would'nt happen to have anything from a neutral source would you? quote: You seem to be the only one who is confused. Good argument. Provide empirical evidence to the contrary to show this. Until then, you suffer from the charges that you level against me. quote: Since when does one need a phd to teach school. All one needs is a bachelors degree and a teaching certificate. Sure, if you want to teach at the primary level, then maybe. There's huge competition for this though. Many teachers now-a-days, even at this level, are expected to have masters degrees. Again, this didn't use to be the case, but when the over-supply of BA's it now is. Up through high school all that is required is a bachelors degree and a teaching credential. To teach at a j.c. you need a masters and a credential.

provfivetine -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 5:32:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx OK http://collegeapps.about.com/od/theartofgettingaccepted/a/ForeignLanguage.htm Read my original post. I specifically stated that many colleges require foreign language to gain acceptance, but not as part of their mandated curriculum. Your link proves nothing, and if anything, it just proves my point. quote: I asked why the value of those science degrees would fall...the above does not answer anything. No you didn't. It's only now you are asking. They would fall because more people would have them. Value is derived from scarcity (I already stated this). If there is an oversupply of a given thing, then it's value is decreased. If there are more science majors out there, then then their value as a certain scientist will fall. Conversely, if there are not as many in existence, then their value will rise. quote: But you feel that they understand the implications of joining the army ie: death or dismemberment etc.? I didn't say that I feel anything about kids joining the military. You're the one that brought it up. But now that you mention it, yes I do think that young kids 17/18/19 years old don't look at these types of things from the perspective of more mature adults. Do you disagree? quote: That students go into debt for an education is hardly in question. The moronic uneducated statement of yours that I asked you to back up was your premis that social sciences are an easier field than the natural sciences. Social Sciences are largely subjective whereas the Natural Sciences are largely objective. For example, historians disagree all the time about what caused X and disagree to a larger extent as to how much weight should be put into each variable. The historian may say that fractional reserve banking contributed to the Great Depression, but each historian is going to weight that differently - some may argue that it didn't play a role at all. A professor in the social sciences is (probably) not going to fail you because you disagree with them. It's all about interpretation, subjectivity, and arguing a good case. Why do you think that there are social science professors that disagree on everything, from fundamental topics to advanced theories. Generally speaking, the natural science professors don't disagree on fundamentals; the natural scientists don't have as much room for subjectivity. No chemist is going to argue that H2o is not water. There are laws, physics and mathematical models that must be learned in the natural sciences. They aren't subjective. They have to be learned and mastered. There isn't such a thing as "the laws of history" (despite what marxists professors will tell you). A student can party all the time and get completely blasted before going into a subjective social science exam. A student that must utilize advanced mathematics and physics, which the natural sciences require, cannot do that going into an objectively based test. There's a reason why they say "You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand this." No one says, "You don't have to be a sociologist to understand this." Do you deny that the social sciences are more subjective than the natural sciences? Studying history, sociology, etc is much easier than studying nuclear engineering or astrophysics. quote: The bias in the jesus links you posted is pretty obvious. You would'nt happen to have anything from a neutral source would you? Yes. Do you disagree with the New York Times article that I sent linked as well? That's one link, and I was just pointing that out to show you that cultural marxism is abundant in the universities. Who cares that it's from a bible-thumper; all news sources contain biases. If you want to research how cultural marxism invaded the social science departments, then enroll in a class in the social sciences at your local college. quote: Up through high school all that is required is a bachelors degree and a teaching credential. To teach at a j.c. you need a masters and a credential. Sure, it may be required, but students that have a masters degree would be accepted before those with bachelors degrees. Most of the teachers that have bachelors only are the more experienced folk that have been teaching for 20+ years. The younger generation won't be as fortunate. Again, you still suffer from "assertion without an argument" syndrome. Don't call my positions moronic, and then provide nothing to substantiate it. REFUTE ME WITH ARGUMENTATION!

Kirata -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 6:19:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen My Bachelor of Science program required a foreign language. The difference between BA and BS programs is that a BS program requires more focused study, either the student mus choose a minor or at least take additional courses in the major. In general BS degrees is taken to mean someone who applied themselves in college while a BA degree is viewed as someone who mostly took electives and did the minimum work needed for a degree. And not only that, a BS's daddy can beat up a BA's daddy! As far as I know, most BAs require a focus too. I went both ways before I made a choice, a bit later in my college career than my faculty advisor liked, but I was willing to pay the price by taking longer to graduate. Science courses are, well, science. Cut and dried. Which isn't to say easy, but there's not a lot in them that's subject to debate. If you really want to see how much abuse your grey matter can take, try a Philosophy major. Of if you want to find out what sheer work is, go for a Literature major. The reading load will make your eyes bleed. You have a very distorted (and self-serving) view of the BA. K.

thompsonx -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 6:42:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx OK http://collegeapps.about.com/od/theartofgettingaccepted/a/ForeignLanguage.htm Read my original post. I specifically stated that many colleges require foreign language to gain acceptance, but not as part of their mandated curriculum. Your link proves nothing, and if anything, it just proves my point. If you do not have the language as a prerequiset then it would have to be completed at the college before graduation...perhaps you should have read both pages of the cite I posted quote: I asked why the value of those science degrees would fall...the above does not answer anything. No you didn't. It's only now you are asking. They would fall because more people would have them. Value is derived from scarcity (I already stated this). If there is an oversupply of a given thing, then it's value is decreased. If there are more science majors out there, then then their value as a certain scientist will fall. Conversely, if there are not as many in existence, then their value will rise. Could you tell us historically what the supply and demand picture has been like for techies for say the last 60 years? Do we currently have a shortage of scientific and tech types? quote: But you feel that they understand the implications of joining the army ie: death or dismemberment etc.? I didn't say that I feel anything about kids joining the military. You're the one that brought it up. But now that you mention it, yes I do think that young kids 17/18/19 years old don't look at these types of things from the perspective of more mature adults. Do you disagree? That was my point. Do you agree that the age to sign a legal binding contract should be raised to say 21? That way the immature would not be allowed to contract for college debt or join the military. quote: That students go into debt for an education is hardly in question. The moronic uneducated statement of yours that I asked you to back up was your premis that social sciences are an easier field than the natural sciences. Social Sciences are largely subjective I was unaware that there was any dispute over the date of the d day invasion, or the date of the dropping of the atomic bomb on hiroshima...did I not get the memo? whereas the Natural Sciences are largely objective. So that whole thing about hole flow has been settled? String theory is now accepted ? Global warming proponents and detractors have resolved their differences baised on subjective data?[8\|] For example, historians disagree all the time about what caused X and disagree to a larger extent as to how much weight should be put into each variable. Do they disagree about verifiable facts? The historian may say that fractional reserve banking contributed to the Great Depression, That would be an economist the historian simply notes that it happened but each historian is going to weight that differently - some may argue that it didn't play a role at all. A professor in the social sciences is (probably) not going to fail you because you disagree with them. Probably[8\|]...lol. A social science professor will fail you for not knowing your subject just like an O chem proffessor will. You are not graded on opinion in the social sciences you are graded on how well you know your subject. If you had ever taken any history,philosophy,social anthropology,music or art classes you would know this. Instead you are content to wallow in ignorance. It's all about interpretation, subjectivity, and arguing a good case. In an econ class if you are asked on the test to define capitalism and you make a case for socialism you will fail the test no matter how persuasive your arguement may be. Why do you think that there are social science professors that disagree on everything, from fundamental topics to advanced theories. Generally speaking, the natural science professors don't disagree on fundamentals; the natural scientists don't have as much room for subjectivity. No chemist is going to argue that H2o is not water. There is however much arguement about it's compresability. Which is a fundamental aspect of water. There are laws, physics and mathematical models that must be learned in the natural sciences. They aren't subjective. So our choice to use the base 10 instead of say base 2 was objective and not subjective? They have to be learned and mastered. There isn't such a thing as "the laws of history" (despite what marxists professors will tell you). Unless you feel that time is just a conspiracy to keep everything from happening all at once then there are absolute laws of history ...alexander preceeds jesus...jesus preceeds frank zappa and so forth A student can party all the time and get completely blasted before going into a subjective social science exam. A student that must utilize advanced mathematics and physics, which the natural sciences require, cannot do that going into an objectively based test. Contrary to your opinion social science exams are not any more subjective than an exam in the natural sciences. There's a reason why they say "You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand this." No one says, "You don't have to be a sociologist to understand this." "They" say a lot of stupid shit don't you think? Do you deny that the social sciences are more subjective than the natural sciences? In a history exam they do not ask how you felt about the voyages of columbus they ask when,where,what and why. All of which are in the text and there are no other correct answers. Studying history, sociology, etc is much easier than studying nuclear engineering or astrophysics. So you have done both and have degrees in both nuclear engineering,astrophysics and history,sociology and you are speaking with the voice of personal experience? quote: The bias in the jesus links you posted is pretty obvious. You would'nt happen to have anything from a neutral source would you? Yes. Do you disagree with the New York Times article that I sent linked as well? That's one link, and I was just pointing that out to show you that cultural marxism is abundant in the universities. Who cares that it's from a bible-thumper; all news sources contain biases. If you want to research how cultural marxism invaded the social science departments, then enroll in a class in the social sciences at your local college. Do you not feel that the study of comparative systems is a good idea? quote: Up through high school all that is required is a bachelors degree and a teaching credential. To teach at a j.c. you need a masters and a credential. Sure, it may be required, but students that have a masters degree would be accepted before those with bachelors degrees. Most of the teachers that have bachelors only are the more experienced folk that have been teaching for 20+ years. The younger generation won't be as fortunate. My neice went to work straight out of college with a ba and a credential teaching high school, in southern california, that was five years ago. She has since picked up a masters but she is the only teacher in her high school with a masters.

outhere69 -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 7:49:54 PM)
FR: I have a BA and a BS and there were no language requirements for either; languages were simply an option within the humanities requirement (we had 5 or so areas of study to fill, including the coursework for your major). With some science fields you need a PhD to do anything other than technician work (astronomy, for example). I actually saw critiques back in the '80s stating that colleges were graduating too many physics majors for the jobs available and that they should tell freshmen exactly how bad the employments situation was. The same is true for many BA degrees - there are so damn many grads out there that about the only thing you can do is go to grad school. Right now there are too many MBAs and JDs - even the Harvard & Yale grads can't find work. Lots of outraged folks with over $100,000 in loans.

provfivetine -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 7:51:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx If you do not have the language as a prerequiset then it would have to be completed at the college before graduation...perhaps you should have read both pages of the cite I posted No it doesn't. That second page just lists the requirements of taking a language at high school and says nothing about the college language requirements while at college - because there isn't! Again, you are not reading my posts. At this point there's nothing to argue. I'm not going to address this anymore. quote: Could you tell us historically what the supply and demand picture has been like for techies for say the last 60 years? Do we currently have a shortage of scientific and tech types? I have no idea what the supply and demand for techies is like over the last 60 years, nor do I intend to do research regarding this. As far as having a shortage, I wouldn't say that there's a shortage of BS's, but I would say that there is an over supply of BA's. quote: That was my point. Do you agree that the age to sign a legal binding contract should be raised to say 21? That way the immature would not be allowed to contract for college debt or join the military. No, I don't think we need to raise an age regarding contractual matters. What does this have to do with the topic at hand? Immaturity is found amongst all age groups; it's not limited to teenagers. quote: I was unaware that there was any dispute over the date of the d day invasion, or the date of the dropping of the atomic bomb on hiroshima...did I not get the memo? Stop this nonsense. I said social sciences are largely subjective. You're nitpicking here, and this is ridiculous. Everyone reading this knows that this is ridiculous. quote: So that whole thing about hole flow has been settled? String theory is now accepted ? Global warming proponents and detractors have resolved their differences baised on subjective data?[8\|] See my response from above. quote: Do they disagree about verifiable facts? I don't know, I can't speak for all historians. Maybe you can start a research project, where you go around the world and conduct interviews with all the historians in the world and ask them if they disagree with a certain verifiable fact. Please come back here and report your findings. quote: That would be an economist the historian simply notes that it happened Fields often overlap; there's a thing called economic history too. Furthermore, this isn't true. Historians often try to give reasons for why a certain event happened. And again, the weight that they assign to each variable differs considerably. quote: Probably[8\|]...lol. A social science professor will fail you for not knowing your subject just like an O chem proffessor will. You are not graded on opinion in the social sciences you are graded on how well you know your subject. If you had ever taken any history,philosophy,social anthropology,music or art classes you would know this. Instead you are content to wallow in ignorance. Another gem of a quote by you. Of course you need to know certain criteria, but the interpretation based off that data is largely subjective. To use your example. The invasion of Normandy happened on June 6 of 1944: what effect did this have on the European theater? Again, the weight assigned to this variable will differ amongst each historian. quote: In an econ class if you are asked on the test to define capitalism and you make a case for socialism you will fail the test no matter how persuasive your arguement may be. Sure. We can define terms how ever we want, but we don't - this is the law of identity. I could pretend that 2+2=5 but it would be ridiculous to do so. What you're saying here is border-lining on being absurd. quote: There is however much arguement about it's compresability. Which is a fundamental aspect of water. Okay, what does this have to do with anything? Of course, there's debate amongst scientists. I never stated that there was agreement on everything. You're taking everything that I'm saying here far too literally just to pretend to argue. quote: So our choice to use the base 10 instead of say base 2 was objective and not subjective? What? quote: Unless you feel that time is just a conspiracy to keep everything from happening all at once then there are absolute laws of history ...alexander preceeds jesus...jesus preceeds frank zappa and so forth That's not a law of history. quote: Contrary to your opinion social science exams are not any more subjective than an exam in the natural sciences. Yes, they are. See everything else that I wrote in this thread. quote: "They" say a lot of stupid shit don't you think? Yes, your posts are an example of this. quote: In a history exam they do not ask how you felt about the voyages of columbus they ask when,where,what and why. All of which are in the text and there are no other correct answers. Yeah, maybe in elementary and middle school, but even at the high school level they ask you about "what did this mean" and "what events were cause by this." At the collegiate level, when someone studies a subject like history, for example, it's all about cultivating a mindset for critical thinking - not memorizing dates. quote: So you have done both and have degrees in both nuclear engineering,astrophysics and history,sociology and you are speaking with the voice of personal experience? I don't have a degree in nuclear engineering, but I took a class on nuclear physics, and yes, it was harder than my other social science classes. SURPRISE! quote: Do you not feel that the study of comparative systems is a good idea? Sure. quote: My neice went to work straight out of college with a ba and a credential teaching high school, in southern california, that was five years ago. She has since picked up a masters but she is the only teacher in her high school with a masters. Congrats for her. She's lucky, and that was before the financial crisis. Today's college graduates won't be as lucky. I'm done debating this. It's getting ridiculous at this point, and I'm sure people reading this would agree.

thompsonx -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 8:21:29 PM)
quote: I'm done debating this. It's getting ridiculous at this point, and I'm sure people reading this would agree. To quote harry callahan..."a mans got to know his limitations". You have obviously found yours.

provfivetine -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 8:25:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I'm done debating this. It's getting ridiculous at this point, and I'm sure people reading this would agree. To quote harry callahan..."a mans got to know his limitations". You have obviously found yours. Yes. I have. I cannot argue with strawmen.

Musicmystery -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 8:26:42 PM)
quote: Today's college students are often advised to stay away from BA degrees. Not by anyone with any clue. Choose your field. As others have noted, BS degrees tend toward the technical fields. There, you have jobs, as long as those areas are flourishing. They don't always. Then, the science-oriented employee has to learn that skills are transferable and how so in a given market. BA degrees can be quite specific and career-oriented too, depending on the field, and jobs depend on the market. The aspect you and others are discussing are the more general ones, and the key here is to recognize the value of this education is the ability to learn and grow and adapt and apply. If a student just does the minimum to get the paper, yup, expect to flip burgers. However, the student learning what the degree is intended to convey will hit the market with broad flexibility and the skills to apply and expand that education. I have writing students, juniors and seniors, some in that major, some from fields from both professional and arts/sciences. Half of them get jobs or internships while they're still in my course. All of them have practical, resume-enhancing portfolios of outside work they've done for clients during the term for the course. Works pretty well. Do want you want to study, learn it well, and understand you need to learn to apply it--it's an education, not a passport. Good luck.

Musicmystery -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 8:30:09 PM)
quote: I have often wondered why MM is such a big NAFTA/Globalization cheerleader, quick to rush to the aid of his damsel whenever it is distressed. Maybe that's because he is an "arts" guy that doesn't live in the present day economic reality the science guys do. Altruism at work, you know. Nope. It's because I look at the actual facts and data, instead of making up crap, as you've done here. I was recruited from a successful business consulting career, exactly because I had made a name learning to live in economic reality and showing others how to do so. Altruism needs to be successful to be altruistic. Hence my focus on economic reality, not Internet myths.

windchymes -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 9:53:56 PM)
One piece of advice I can offer is, no matter what degree you earn, don't waltz into any prospective employer and take on that "entitled" attitude so many seem to have today. I can guarantee that the people already there do not feel any obligation to either hire you or grant you a big salary right out of the starting gate simply because you are waving a degree in your hand. You'll be much better off showing a little humility and eagerness to work and to learn. Get your foot in the door, take the starting salary and work your way up. You'll be much more respected, getting experience, and opportunities will come your way, while the entitled guy who thinks he deserves the big bucks will still be flipping those burgers. Hey, someone's gotta do it, lunch is coming!

tazzygirl -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 9:57:11 PM)
Great advice. Do they no longer teach grads that they may change jobs 5 times before they settle?

coookie -> RE: Bachelor of science or arts? (6/2/2011 10:25:43 PM)
I took a year of Spanish for my BA but it wasn't required .. nor would i ever call myself bilingual. If you were going to stop at your BA then yes there are few positions though there are a few like addictions counselling. If you get your Masters or your PhD it opens the field substantially. I know that in Canada you can teach at the uni level with your masters in english and in some provinces you can go into clinical counselling. There are options. Look into them deeper. If you hate math why get a math job? so you can hate your job? blah life is too short

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875