If anything I'd say sciences is easier to do well in. There is always that one right question and the influence of the marker cannot change that. In Arts, the marker could be a prick, completely disagree with you, and give you a crap grade even though its an awesome paper. haha
We all know less intelligence is required in the Arts. You just need a good imagination and a little bit of creativity to survive in the Arts (considering 90% of the Arts consist of essays).
I don't know that. Not everyone has a good imagination and a "little bit" of creativity.
But I know that a computer can do math and physics better than humans can while it's a different matter regarding essays.
But I know that a computer can do math and physics better than humans can while it's a different matter regarding essays.
Now who do you think made the computers and programmed them to do so in the first place? Who thought up the theorems and formulas?
As I've said, Science is based on logic. Computers are based on logic. Computers are dumb, they only know true or false. Computers aren't "better" at problem solving, you're essentially just giving the computer some set of input values then they compute the output value through some formula that the programmer implemented.
Science answers are either right or wrong like 99% of the time. With arts, there's no such thing as a "wrong" answer, it's only an opinion. Most people could BS their way through an essay and still get a C or C+. That's why you need a good imagination and some creativity to do well in Arts.
you said and i quote "only if you're an idiot".. that doesn't say/mean anything close to what you've said above.. now if i'm wrong at interpreting this as it was said.. then i'll apologize.. but can you or anyone tell me what should be interpreted out of such a quote.. contextually?
if you read things in context it means exactly what I said in the para you quoted. here let me demonstrate:
Student0667;39535 said:
Those courses are GPA killers.
the original claim that they're GPA killers, which is a course in which you will receive a much lower grade than all your other courses, as explained in the para you quoted.
primexx;39537 said:
only if you're an idiot
my response to that claim, you can find this sentence in the para you quoted as well.
Ether;39592 said:
I think "sucking at basic reasoning" usually implies idiocy, but you never know. There could be exceptions.
a synonym for the word "idiot".
primexx;39581 said:
I'm saying they won't be "GPA killers" because the vast majority of people have the capacity of doing the course just as well as their other courses (if you get a C in the course, but also in all your other courses, it could hardly be considered a GPA killer for you). the only way someone could possibly see a huge difference between the grade for the course and other courses is really only if they really did suck at basic reasoning and didn't take any other courses that substantially needed it.
this explains why my response is true. notice that it incorporates every previous element within the explanation.
then answer my original question.. do you think you're not an idiot? and those who think they're GPA killers or receive a much lower grade than their other courses are?
having capacity to do the course and doing well in the course are two different things.. and a vast majority of people don't do well in these courses.. (and i dare say that some science students might not even do as well as they should given their strong logical sense) atleast not as well as they do in other or major courses hence leading to why i said philosophy is not for everyone.. but for the most part.. it is a fair statement to say it's a GPA killer because a lot of people think so (go ask around and you'll see).. and they're not just idiots..
then answer my original question.. do you think you're not an idiot? and those who think they're GPA killers or receive a much lower grade than their other courses are?
having capacity to do the course and doing well in the course are two different things.. and a vast majority of people don't do well in these courses.. (and i dare say that some science students might not even do as well as they should given their strong logical sense) atleast not as well as they do in other or major courses hence leading to why i said philosophy is not for everyone.. but for the most part.. it is a fair statement to say it's a GPA killer because a lot of people think so (go ask around and you'll see).. and they're not just idiots..
if you have the capacity to do well and just don't, that's your problem, now, isn't it?
Can't we all agree that West Philosophy deals with nothing but BS and thus has little to no contribution to society or academia? At least the philosophy of Confucius and Mencius of Ancient China teach us how to cultivate ourselves and make us better human beings.
Sometimes, I just wish that the Persians would just destory the Greek Civilization so I don't have to deal with Plato and Aristotle's *rap.
Can't we all agree that West Philosophy deals with nothing but BS and thus has little to no contribution to society or academia? At least the philosophy of Confucius and Mencius of Ancient China teach us how to cultivate ourselves and make us better human beings.
Sometimes, I just wish that the Persians would just destory the Greek Civilization so I don't have to deal with Plato and Aristotle's *rap.
Aristotle and Plato were the original "scientists"....they were the ones that introduced a logical way of thinking when analyzing the natural world. They were also the first philosophers to separate the natural world from supernatural phenomena. lol just because i disagree with you on plato and aristotle, im gunna say Confucius and friends provide nothing but some self-help crap
hey.. no philosopher-bashing on a philosophy thread!! i can overlook this if you were shakespeare-bashing.. but you guys should know better.. =P give these dead guys some credit will ya?
Aristotle and Plato were the original "scientists"....they were the ones that introduced a logical way of thinking when analyzing the natural world.
Boo hoo! Ok, look, I don't have that much beef against Aristotle because I see a few parallel of his idea of the "Golden Mean" with Confucius' Doctrine of the Mean.
But seriously, if they are so smart, why didn't Plato and Aristotle's ideas of "the philosopher king," "golden mean," and other yap yap become an integral part of Western culture while Confucianism become synonymous with Chinese culture and civilization until the early 20th century? Seriously, even the fuc*in Mongols, who conquered China in the 13th century, fell in love with Confucianism!
I will tell you why, because Plato and his ideas pretty much goes against everything humanity stood for. Seriously, Philosopher King > Democracy? Socrates' death is a crime against Humanity? First of all, while democracy does have its flaws, but Plato's wetdream of a philosopher king isn't any better either. At least democracy survive and the closest thing we have to a philosopher king is a dictatorship. Also, Socrates pretty much asked for it.
They were also the first philosophers to separate the natural world from supernatural phenomena.
Ooh, like someone else wouldn't figure this out.
siuying;39701 said:
hey.. no philosopher-bashing on a philosophy thread!! i can overlook this if you were shakespeare-bashing.. but you guys should know better.. =P give these dead guys some credit will ya?
I will give anyone credit where credit is due. To me, these philosophers deserves little to no credit because, like I said, they contributed next to nothing to society. Right now, I am in this course on Medieval Philosophy and there are two *hitpiece call Anslem and Guanilo and they are debating how they can prove God exist? I mean, come on, you two are wasting your time dealing with "how you can prove God exist" when Vikings are ravaging your North coast and Genghis Khan will be coming in 100 years later? Don't they have anything better to do? Oh I don't know, people's life expedency is quite low, maybe you can work on that? Or you can satisify your religious fanatacism by debating why Christendom sucks so much during the Crusades and why do Crusaders in later Crusades successively get their ass handed to them on a silver platter.
Sometimes, I just wish that the Muslims would defeat Charles Martels at the Battle of Tour and conquer the whole of Western Europe. At least "There is no God but God and Muhammad is his Prophet." is a more straight forward than this Trinity and Aryan crap.
But seriously, if they are so smart, why didn't Plato and Aristotle's ideas of "the philosopher king," "golden mean," and other yap yap become an integral part of Western culture while Confucianism become synonymous with Chinese culture and civilization until the early 20th century?
Philosophy is about truth, more or less. The popularity of any given philosophy doesn't affect the validity of its conclusions.
[quote] They were also the first philosophers to separate the natural world from supernatural phenomena.
Ooh, like someone else wouldn't figure this out. [/quote]
You're being ridiculous. By that logic you could just as well say "Oh, Isaac Newton wasn't so great. If he hadn't come up with the theory of gravity, someone else would have."
I will give anyone credit where credit is due. To me, these philosophers deserves little to no credit because, like I said, they contributed next to nothing to society.
So in your opinion, something is worthless if it doesn't contribute to society? What are you, some kind of socialist?
Regardless, philosophy does contribute to society. Just take the modern theories of Ethics for example.
EDIT: By the way.. If you want to curse out some more historical figures you might want to try using the full words. They're spelled as follows. Fuck Shit Crap
Can't we all agree that West Philosophy deals with nothing but BS and thus has little to no contribution to society or academia? At least the philosophy of Confucius and Mencius of Ancient China teach us how to cultivate ourselves and make us better human beings.
Sometimes, I just wish that the Persians would just destory the Greek Civilization so I don't have to deal with Plato and Aristotle's *rap.
hahahahahaha zomg lol rofl most of what the so called ancient chinese "philosophers" spout are pseudo-religious spiritual and ceremonial bullshit, as opposed to the foundations of modern philosophy which plato et al began to build (they of course had their share of bullshit too), you're inverting the credits just a little bit.
Student0667;39705 said:
But seriously, if they are so smart, why didn't Plato and Aristotle's ideas of "the philosopher king," "golden mean," and other yap yap become an integral part of Western culture while Confucianism become synonymous with Chinese culture and civilization until the early 20th century? Seriously, even the fuc*in Mongols, who conquered China in the 13th century, fell in love with Confucianism!
Ever considered it's because of the widely contrasting cultures. Western culture emphasizes critical reflection of ideas that are put forward (partly due to the philosophical tradition that plato et al. themselves shaped), which means bad ideas get recognized as such and better ones are developed. Chinese culture, even today, is very much centered around the unquestioning obedience to authority, be it contemporary or in the form of tradition, and that self-propagates the same wrong crap thousand-year-old dead men said.
I'm in the ancient phil course (350) right now and I find that those ancient philosophers were actually quite clever once you consider the times they were in and the lack of scientific knowledge compared to today.
They weren't totally useless since they formed a base for future philosophers to explore on.
Comments
and to say people in arts suck at basic reasoning.. well that's even a more impressive statement than primexx's to say the least..
But I know that a computer can do math and physics better than humans can while it's a different matter regarding essays.
edit: Source: Penrose and his two books The Emperor's new Mind and Shadows of the Mind.
As I've said, Science is based on logic. Computers are based on logic. Computers are dumb, they only know true or false. Computers aren't "better" at problem solving, you're essentially just giving the computer some set of input values then they compute the output value through some formula that the programmer implemented.
Science answers are either right or wrong like 99% of the time. With arts, there's no such thing as a "wrong" answer, it's only an opinion. Most people could BS their way through an essay and still get a C or C+. That's why you need a good imagination and some creativity to do well in Arts.
hey, stop hating on the arts mmkay?
having capacity to do the course and doing well in the course are two different things.. and a vast majority of people don't do well in these courses.. (and i dare say that some science students might not even do as well as they should given their strong logical sense) atleast not as well as they do in other or major courses hence leading to why i said philosophy is not for everyone.. but for the most part.. it is a fair statement to say it's a GPA killer because a lot of people think so (go ask around and you'll see).. and they're not just idiots..
but if you say so.. then it's right back at ya.. =)
Sometimes, I just wish that the Persians would just destory the Greek Civilization so I don't have to deal with Plato and Aristotle's *rap.
lol just because i disagree with you on plato and aristotle, im gunna say Confucius and friends provide nothing but some self-help crap
i can overlook this if you were shakespeare-bashing.. but you guys should know better.. =P
give these dead guys some credit will ya?
But seriously, if they are so smart, why didn't Plato and Aristotle's ideas of "the philosopher king," "golden mean," and other yap yap become an integral part of Western culture while Confucianism become synonymous with Chinese culture and civilization until the early 20th century? Seriously, even the fuc*in Mongols, who conquered China in the 13th century, fell in love with Confucianism!
I will tell you why, because Plato and his ideas pretty much goes against everything humanity stood for. Seriously, Philosopher King > Democracy? Socrates' death is a crime against Humanity? First of all, while democracy does have its flaws, but Plato's wetdream of a philosopher king isn't any better either. At least democracy survive and the closest thing we have to a philosopher king is a dictatorship. Also, Socrates pretty much asked for it. Ooh, like someone else wouldn't figure this out. I will give anyone credit where credit is due. To me, these philosophers deserves little to no credit because, like I said, they contributed next to nothing to society. Right now, I am in this course on Medieval Philosophy and there are two *hitpiece call Anslem and Guanilo and they are debating how they can prove God exist? I mean, come on, you two are wasting your time dealing with "how you can prove God exist" when Vikings are ravaging your North coast and Genghis Khan will be coming in 100 years later? Don't they have anything better to do? Oh I don't know, people's life expedency is quite low, maybe you can work on that? Or you can satisify your religious fanatacism by debating why Christendom sucks so much during the Crusades and why do Crusaders in later Crusades successively get their ass handed to them on a silver platter.
Sometimes, I just wish that the Muslims would defeat Charles Martels at the Battle of Tour and conquer the whole of Western Europe. At least "There is no God but God and Muhammad is his Prophet." is a more straight forward than this Trinity and Aryan crap.
[/quote]
You're being ridiculous. By that logic you could just as well say "Oh, Isaac Newton wasn't so great. If he hadn't come up with the theory of gravity, someone else would have."
So in your opinion, something is worthless if it doesn't contribute to society? What are you, some kind of socialist?
Regardless, philosophy does contribute to society. Just take the modern theories of Ethics for example.
EDIT:
By the way..
If you want to curse out some more historical figures you might want to try using the full words.
They're spelled as follows.
Fuck
Shit
Crap
They weren't totally useless since they formed a base for future philosophers to explore on.