NationStates Jolt Archive

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

no

Horses for courses. Each to their own...

they're completely different things
you can't really compare.
science and art have both contributed their part to society in their own way

being a sciency kinda person myself, though, i am sorely tempted to say that of course, art is inferior.

and where can you do a subject like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" ???
thats crazy stuff.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

Yes.

Learning should be done out of desire. I get this type of crap all of the time; i'm a politics/international studies major. For some reason, this means that I am stupid, and i'm frankly sick of hearing it coming my way.

I'm perfectly capable of studying the sciences, believe me. I just don't want to at this point in time.

This doesn't make me stupid. There is value in the arts as well, even if you can't see it. A world without literature, history, music, etc. would be a very dull and dreary one. "humanity's future", indeed.

Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

Art and theater maybe, but there are plenty of 'liberal arts' majors that do amount to something. A good number become editors, technical writers, lawyers, social workers, teachers, etc. Science isn't everything, and a good number of "hard science" majors amount to nothing, just like you'd expect a theater major to.

Chemistry and biology...

What, exactly, are you going to do with a pure science degree!

Now I know things are different in the States than over here, but (I'm at my university right now) I'm studying Medical Imaging.

At the end of my 3 year course I will have a BSc (Honours) in Diagnostic Radiography. I will be able to take this qualification to anywhere in the EU and Australia (sp?) where I will then be able to work in a hosptial providing an essentail service.

Now you're going for a double science major... well good on you... but what are you actually going to do with that?

If you've got a job lined up, then by all means rant about 'art' subjects. But it seems to me this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?
Yes

Australia (sp?).

Yeah, that's right :p

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

Now I'm going to explain myself a little more. I've had this discussion with a friend of mine for years. He studied computers and I made History, now I'm working as archeologist. The value of a discipline goes much further than it's economic value. Humanity needs much more things than science and technology to be happy and a Shakespeare's plays can maybe explain better the human being than biology. Of course, it's sad to see how scientifically illiterate people is, myself included. But the opposite happens also, most of "scientist" have a poor idea of humanities or social sciences, as mine.

You've talked about human progress, but sciences had also played a key role on the worst part of our history. Look just at the atomic energy, for exemple.

By the way, what major is? I see it's a degree but I don't know wich one. Can you tell me the average age to get it? thanks

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?
You are right and wrong.
Yes there are BS courses but some parts of an Edamacation is so you can learn new things not for you to get rich.
Socrates would be most disappointed.

believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.


Of course you can never be 100% sure on that since to find out you'd have to study History. An arts subject.

Nevertheless, simply arriving at this conclusion with no evidence doesn't sound like a very scientific way of doing things, so meh.

Of course, it's sad to see how scientifically illiterate people is, myself included. But the opposite happens also, most of "scientist" have a poor idea of humanities or social sciences, as mine.


So an Arts/ Science degree is ideal? :D

When I think about what this world would be like without the contributions of dwarves, freaks, and foreigners; I weep for humanity.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?
I'm an Engineer (MEng Computing, Software Engineering specialisation), most of my friends are Scientists and Engineers (One later went to the Dark Side and did a second degree in Lawyering, and my girlfriend and another female friend studied Business; a course I really don't understand the application of) and it's hard to see why people wouldn't value scientific and engineering courses more than other, woolier subjects*. They would seem to offer far more; how else can you make new discoveries, build new technologies?


*Sheep Studies, anyone?

Chemistry and biology...

What, exactly, are you going to do with a pure science degree!

Now I know things are different in the States than over here, but (I'm at my university right now) I'm studying Medical Imaging.

At the end of my 3 year course I will have a BSc (Honours) in Diagnostic Radiography. I will be able to take this qualification to anywhere in the EU and Australia (sp?) where I will then be able to work in a hosptial providing an essentail service.

Now you're going for a double science major... well good on you... but what are you actually going to do with that?

If you've got a job lined up, then by all means rant about 'art' subjects. But it seems to me this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
You mean Austria?

You mean Austria?

And this coming from someone from sheepy land :p

So an Arts/ Science degree is ideal? :D

It's not just an degree question but to build a complet person. In the renaissance (I think it's the name in english) science men were also artist and they couldn't understand to split it into two diferent things. About degrees, I felt that my studies lacked some technical part, about statistics or computer sofware, for example. And I don't think people studies ethics in biology or chemistry, while it should be important to think how are we going to use the new scientific or technical discoveries.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors.No, they are. Now, Communications... that's a fake degree.

It's not just an degree question but to build a complet person. In the renaissance (I think it's the name in english) science men were also artist and they couldn't understand to split it into two diferent things. About degrees, I felt that my studies lacked some technical part, about statistics or computer sofware, for example. And I don't think people studies ethics in biology or chemistry, while it should be important to think how are we going to use the new scientific or technical discoveries.
Actually my Computing degree contained an Ethics course. Complete waste of time; so wooly as to be meaningless, ethics are entirely subjective anyway, and if you care at all you'll work it out for yourself (or already have them indoctrinated into you).

No, they are. Now, Communications... that's a fake degree.
All depends on what they're studying... Do you know how both mobile and wired telephone networks operate? The backbone of the internet? TCP/IP? Radio and television?
You probably know the basics of how some or all of those work. But could you build them?

They would seem to offer far more; how else can you make new discoveries, build new technologies?

Is a silly argument, I can say also how else can you make a new piece of art or understand humanity? If you think discoveries and new technologies are the only aim in education is easy to think like you. "Science studies are better 'cause is the only way to do science" If you had studied philosophy, you'd know that's a wrong way of arguing.

All depends on what they're studying... Do you know how both mobile and wired telephone networks operate? The backbone of the internet? TCP/IP? Radio and television?
You probably know the basics of how some or all of those work. But could you build them?

I think communications degrees mostly center around multimedia, journalism, etc.

It's not just an degree question but to build a complet person. In the renaissance (I think it's the name in english) science men were also artist and they couldn't understand to split it into two diferent things. About degrees, I felt that my studies lacked some technical part, about statistics or computer sofware, for example. And I don't think people studies ethics in biology or chemistry, while it should be important to think how are we going to use the new scientific or technical discoveries.

Ethics is a compulsory part of my science degree. :)

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?


I have a silly question for the scientist: Why then had all societies need to study arts? Actually, for most of the time from, let's say the greeks, the art studies have been more important to the society than the science and technology, specially the last one. Please, anwers.

Is a silly argument, I can say also how else can you make a new piece of art or understand humanity? If you think discoveries and new technologies are the only aim in education is easy to think like you. "Science studies are better 'cause is the only way to do science" If you had studied philosophy, you'd know that's a wrong way of arguing.
No, it's different. You can make a peice of art without ever having seen another peice of art, let alone after studying it for three or four years. The value of the art you produce is subjective.
You can attempt to understand humans in various ways, depending on how you need to understand them; A biologist would obviously use their science. Someone who doesn't need to know how they work can simply interact with them and watch them. Almost everyone has a model of human behaviour in their head; without it interacting would be nigh-on impossible. You can make this more rigorous and turn it into sociology; a branch of science.

As for science and engineering, without knowing what's gone before you will be making the same mistakes and discoveries your predecessors have made. Anyone can make a bridge by laying a tree accross a river, but can you build a suspension bridge, or even a rope bridge? If you study Civil Engineering you'll hopefully be able to, because you'll have learned the physical principles necessary. These aren't subjective. You might be a humble mouse-trap designer, discover something new and wind up with a better mouse-trap.

I think communications degrees mostly center around multimedia, journalism, etc.
That sounds like a wasted (and misleading) course title to me.

Alexander the 1337
To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution.

"Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" - just :headbang:
"Transgender studies" - that's not all bad...


To widen the question, what about social sciences i.e. anthropology, sociology etc. It would seem to me that they are are the scientific (or as near as such a study could get) study of culture (i.e. arts, theatre etc.)
and, as an anthropology major myself, in an age when more than ever before, the world is at odds with itself, i would argue that they are more important in understanding how people (cultures) approach science, other subjects and other cultures than just limiting your thinking to how we might apply the newest physics discovery to the coating of non-stick frying pans.

no flaming intended, but open your eyes

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

I think it's really ignorant to claim that arts and other cultural movements are inferior to scientific investigation. You'd better think twice. We don't live in labs.

No, it's different. You can make a peice of art without ever having seen another peice of art, let alone after studying it for three or four years. The value of the art you produce is subjective.
You can attempt to understand humans in various ways, depending on how you need to understand them; A biologist would obviously use their science. Someone who doesn't need to know how they work can simply interact with them and watch them. Almost everyone has a model of human behaviour in their head; without it interacting would be nigh-on impossible. You can make this more rigorous and turn it into sociology; a branch of science.


It's utter nonsense to claim this. You're confusing theory with the practical: theory-wise, everything is possible... But practically, nobody makes a work of art out of nowhere, it's formed in the subjective experience, which can't be cut loose of the environment. Art, culture and human understanding are related issues.
As a biologist would use science, an artist uses it's own methods, explicitly or not.

No, they are. Now, Communications... that's a fake degree.

*cough*Gender and Women's Studies*cough*

Come on "GEND 307 – Special Topic: Listening to Women's Stories" A 300 level paper (3rd year) about listening to womens stories.

No, it's different. You can make a peice of art without ever having seen another peice of art, let alone after studying it for three or four years. The value of the art you produce is subjective.
You can attempt to understand humans in various ways, depending on how you need to understand them; A biologist would obviously use their science. Someone who doesn't need to know how they work can simply interact with them and watch them. Almost everyone has a model of human behaviour in their head; without it interacting would be nigh-on impossible. You can make this more rigorous and turn it into sociology; a branch of science.

As for science and engineering, without knowing what's gone before you will be making the same mistakes and discoveries your predecessors have made. Anyone can make a bridge by laying a tree accross a river, but can you build a suspension bridge, or even a rope bridge? If you study Civil Engineering you'll hopefully be able to, because you'll have learned the physical principles necessary. These aren't subjective. You might be a humble mouse-trap designer, discover something new and wind up with a better mouse-trap.


That sounds like a wasted (and misleading) course title to me.

Ok, maybe the piece of art is not a good example. But we have the piece of art. How can we understand what does it mean?
And you talk about sociology as a science, so History, anthropology and so are also science, but you'll never get a material advance from them 'cause they are social sciences. And you need them to understand, for instance, the history.

By the way, you've not answered my question: why have been always in the studies of any complex society?

*cough*Gender and Women's Studies*cough*

Come on "GEND 307 – Special Topic: Listening to Women's Stories" A 300 level paper (3rd year) about listening to womens stories.

Did it ever occur to you that people studying those subjects might do so purely out of interest? What's wrong with that?

Ok, maybe the piece of art is not a good example. But we have the piece of art. How can we understand what does it mean?
And you talk about sociology as a science, so History, anthropology and so are also science, but you'll never get a material advance from them 'cause they are social sciences. And you need them to understand, for instance, the history.
What art "means" isn't something I'm even going to pretend to understand. So far as I can tell it's just made up :s
History isn't classed as a science, typically; but it'll be built on archaology, which is. The same as the difference between geography and geology. I think, perhaps.
Actually sociology and similar can offer you advances; by studying the behaviour of people in groups it was determined that by putting a divider in the middle of a gateway (so instead of having one large entrance you had two entrances half the size) you can get people through more quickly as they flow more smoothly. It's counter-intuitive, but it works.
By the way, you've not answered my question: why have been always in the studies of any complex society?
I don't really know (Not a historian, after all ;) ) but I'd be inclined to blame religion; people do enjoy making art to worship or glorify their gods, and the study of religious texts to divine their meaning isn't any different to the study of Shakespeare.
Although you don't get your head chopped off for claiming that Romeo and Juliet just lacked patience, common sense and communication, and if they'd sat down, talked about it and not been so eager to off themselves at the drop of a hat...

Did it ever occur to you that people studying those subjects might do so purely out of interest? What's wrong with that?

Wastes valuable university resources :D . And takes up space so I have to walk further between classes.

Wastes valuable university resources :D .

In most cases, the students are paying...

And takes up space so I have to walk further between classes.

It'll do you good. :p

In most cases, the students are paying...



It'll do you good. :p

Haha theres no way them damn BA people are paying enough, theres a god damned art gallery on campus....

As a side note I dont really need the exercise despite being a science student

Haha theres no way them damn BA people are paying enough, theres a god damned art gallery on campus....

I'm $12000 in debt at the end of my course, and that doesn't count the fact that i'm getting a government subsidy. That's not enough for you?

I'm $12000 in debt at the end of my course, and that doesn't count the fact that i'm getting a government subsidy. That's not enough for you?
Australian dollars, right? Lightweight! That's less than five thousand pounds! My student loan's currently weighing in at over £14,000.
It'll never get paid off; Not worth it. Never mind, it's nullified eventually.

Edit: And it's all the "socialist" Labour government's fault; education was free before them...

I'm $12000 in debt at the end of my course, and that doesn't count the fact that i'm getting a government subsidy. That's not enough for you?

*shrug* we all have our loans for university these days. Don't take it too personally I don't really hate BA students (although I still say some of the majors are sort of rediculous) and if they want an art gallery as long as it doesn't take away the money I need for liquid nitrogen fine.

Australian dollars, right? Lightweight! That's less than five thousand pounds! My student loan's currently weighing in at over £14,000.
It'll never get paid off; Not worth it. Never mind, it's nullified eventually.

Yeah, it's more for science and law students, etc.

Edit: And it's all the "socialist" Labour government's fault; education was free before them...

So it should be.


*shrug* we all have our loans for university these days. Don't take it too personally I don't really hate BA students (although I still say some of the majors are sort of rediculous) and if they want an art gallery as long as it doesn't take away the money I need for liquid nitrogen fine.

Yeah, some of the majors are ridiculous in terms of being able to find employment, but if people want to study them, well, whatever.

I just get ridiculous amounts of flak for being an arts student - family, friends, workmates, everyone. Ugh! I get so very sick of it...I chose to study politics because that's what interested me. I don't see anything wrong with that.

As for wasting money you need for liquid nitrogen, well, I know that's not a problem at my uni - they're involved in building a cyclotron of all things. :p

Although you don't get your head chopped off for claiming that Romeo and Juliet just lacked patience, common sense and communication, and if they'd sat down, talked about it and not been so eager to off themselves at the drop of a hat...
Spoken like a true engineer. ;)

I straddled both, I had more friends in the hard sciences, but I was an education major. The reason for the fuzzies is that humans DON'T act logically. You might complain about Romeo and Juliet's solution to their problems, but the genius of Shakespeare is that he managed to get real human feelings on paper.

My stats professor, when lecturing to us about research setups noted that the hard sciences always had a problem with the use of qualitative research instead of quantative. They always want the hard numbers that can be applied to every situation under a neat formula. The humanities answer to that though is humans are rarely logical and neat numbers rarely come up in human interactions. Tends do, but nothing like a hard and fast rule.

Or as I told my friend the ChemE, "You work with chemicals that you KNOW how they will go boom. I teach children and I have no idea how or when they might go boom."

Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?


No.

Graham Greene in The Quiet American made some great remarks on silly subjects that somehow merit a degree in the eyes of the perenially deluded.

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

so I was also a double major is college in both Biology and Chemistry (B.S. in both) and an Art minor. I took the art minor because I loved painting, wasn't hald bad at it, and it was a mental escape for me. 95% of my friends were Communications and English Lit majors. I wouldn't say that they are not "real" majors, but looking at a full class load (18-19 credits) of math, science, physics credits vs. the same in interpersonal communications or non-verbal communication...well, let's just say I sometimes felt I had the "more difficult" major.

That being said, let me ask this. In college, are you not supposed to find the thing you are passionate about and turn it into a career? THe other major point in going to college, besides learning information, is to also learn how to think! Its one point I try to emphasis to my incoming freshamn chem class. NOt only do you need to learn the concepts, memorize the dates, etc., but you learn critical thinking skills. In fact, i think that is one of the most important things that you learn in college and something you can learn in any major.

As for art, theater, etc. not giving any progress to the human race, I have to disagree. Art, music, and such keeps us sane, gives us humans joy, passion, and emotion. Trust me, I would not want to live in a world were everyone is a "lab rat" and completely scientific. No art? No music? gaaahh, what a boring life.

Spoken like a true engineer. ;)
Thank you :)

Or as I told my friend the ChemE, "You work with chemicals that you KNOW how they will go boom. I teach children and I have no idea how or when they might go boom."
Children more dangerous than petrol?
Definitely ;)

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?
You are wrong to think that subjects like Art History, English, and Theatre are inherently less challenging or worthwhile than the sciences. The classes the kicked my ass the most thoroughly in college were my philosophy courses (I majored in Biology, Psychology-Phys, and Philosophy). However, at certain schools there may be departments (and majors) that are utter jokes.

For instance, at my school all the hockey players majored in Sociology, because it required only 5 courses to complete the "degree," including a supposed "science lab course" that was entitled "Beaches And Shores." Yes, their science credit was fulfilled by going to the beach and the shore.

After a long argument with my ex and her new beau, I've decided to throw this one to the forums. I am a double major in both Biology and Chemistry (BS in both, I'm not going to be a pseudo-science major). To me, it's simply shocking that a college can have classes like "Dwarves, Freaks, and Foreigners in Art" and "Transgender studies" and still be respected as an academic institution. What's more shocking is that parents put forth money so their kids can major in things like this.

My point: Art History and English (her major) and Theatre (his) are not real majors. The fact that so many people go to school and major in things like these, makes me fear for humanity's future. I believe that science has contributed more to the human race's progress than any art (of any variety) could ever hope to.

I'm wondering if I'm being too harsh on them, or if I'm onto something. It really does get to me, the sheer numbers of people who're scientifically illiterate. Am I wrong to think that art and theatre are inferior to chemistry and biology?

You're absolutely right, arts and humanities are inferior to Biology and Chemistry. And Biology and Chemistry are massively inferior to Mathematics and Physics as all sciences are merely an approximation of the basic physical laws involving complex mathematics.

Can you guess what degree I did?

I'm doing a BA, and I do get rather bored with that wierd look that commerce students give me when I tell them. Fuck off and do your applied maths, no one cares what you think or that you're 'more likely to get a job afterwards'.

I'm doing a BA, and I do get rather bored with that wierd look that commerce students give me when I tell them. Fuck off and do your applied maths, no one cares what you think or that you're 'more likely to get a job afterwards'.

Exactly. :D