Why do you hate the humanities?

>>7678064
I don't hate humanities in the same way I don't hate a flies, but I'll swot it when it gets annoying.

>>7678064
>implying /his/ and /int/ aren't my other main boards

>>7678070
But do you think the humanities is worthless because it doesn't supply something marketable, or do you think it is intrinsically worthless as a discipline?

>>7678064
Too banal. I'm damn good at humanities, but it's too easy, and it's practically only useful to keep scientists at least somewhat sociable (and for politics, which I loathe).

>>7678074
Get out

>>7678086
In what sense is philosophy easy though?

Arguing properly and giving sufficient justifications for positions, or alternatively following proper logic in analytics isn't as easy as it seems though.

>>7678064
There is no real way of measuring the work of a humanities major in almost all cases.

It's much easier to do with stem to see if someone knows their shit or if someones design is good. With humanities its much harder and it's too easy for them to just push bullshit through without there being any kind of real quality control.

>>7678084
If it is marketable or not doesn't matter for me, I like pure mathematics for example. However I don't see the purpose of studying something where your prime goal isn't to learn a specific thing, but rather to be able to discuss and motivate your choices. I'm thinking of pedagogy and religion for example, where years of studies doesn't necessarily make you better than someone who has never studies the topics.

I don't hate humanities. I hate people studying humanities thinking they make the world go round.

>>7678084
That's a question only a philosopher would ask. Get him!

>>7678084
>intrinsically worthless as a discipline

that's too harsh, but confirmation bias is waay too prevalent in humanities

>>7678064
It is far too prone to manipulation by political movements. This invariable leads to propaganda marketed as `science`.

What OP wants you to think the humanities are:
>Philosophy
>Psychology
>English
>Law
>Etc.

What 99.99% of people studing 'humanities' are doing:
>Sociology
>Politics
>Womyns Studies
>Short story writing
>etc.

File: how i view myself right now.jpg (7KB, 222x204px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 222x204px

i don't
i hate humanities majors

>>7678167

I was taking a Greek Mythology class, and the professor said humanities were the most important thing studied at a University. I actually laughed, and everyone in the room looked at me.

I was, and felt like a total asshole. At the same time, across campus we had a lab that was nationally known for their work on Parkinson's disease, and in another lab they were doing great work in alternative fuels.

>>7678105
Fucking this, so much.

The problem with the humanities is the rampant relativism. People just won't stop to analyze works and do measurements and comparisons, claiming that all is relative and you can't measure x.

Its a waste of money and ressources. Governments spend millions and millions on people putting paint on paper and writting shitty short stories because they think this counts as education.

>Engineering Department at Uni in dire need of new machinery since we stuff we got is like from the 70s
>Hey guis lets give the Lib arts 5 Million € more next month, thatll attract more students!

Also as said before theres just no market for all of this and it tends to get people to make bad career decisions. Opportunity cost of people tied up in useless fields that depend on public funding.

Also most of these people have better social lifes than me and/or look better so im jelly as fug.

File: 461.png (339KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 680x680px

>>7678439
This
>you can't know nuffin

>>7678423
This. It's not that I hate the humanities. It's that I hate the majority of the current crop of humanities majors. Basically, they are spending tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars on a bullshit degree that they can hang on the wall of their smokeout room while they flip burgers and struggle to make ends meet, all while blaming a system that they claim taught them that any college degree would guarantee them a good job after school.

It fosters the whole "special snowflake" complex.

> "Why should I have to work hard to succeed? I've been told my whole life how smart and special I am by my parents, teachers, and friends. I'm really a good person, I just don't want to step out of my comfort zone. Why can't employers see that, as well, and cut me the same slack I've gotten my whole life?"

>>7678443
This, so much. I would have laughed at that, as well.

>Med lab: working on Parkinson's
>Chem lab: exploring alternative fuel
>Humanities class: talking about millenia-old fictional characters and contemplate navel

"We're the most important department in the university!"

>>7678064
Don't hate the humanities. But people who study humanities can be real fucking cock gobblers.
>Uncultured swine
>My degree is better than your degree

Just don't forget that engineers and math/science majors can be some shitty little cunt starved mongrels too
>stupid bitchass can't even understand relativity
>My degree is better than your degree

>>7678443
not the most important, but probably up there among the top few for me

>hurr durr STEM
>hurr durr Humanities

Why can we just get along? We need becoming a Renaissance man to become a popular ideal again. The rift between STEM and liberal arts is an artificial one created from the layout of our higher education system pigeon-holing you into either a science track or lib arts track.

>>7678084
It depends on what you mean. There are humanities and humanities. I like economics; as a field it has the balls to put its money where it's mouth is and makes predictions, it's mathy and more like science. I like philosophy, a really good field for dealing with questions science can't really come to grips with. I am ambivalent about history; I enjoy reading it, as a hobby, but I think it's completely bankrupt as a discipline. They are the opposite of economics, a field completely unwilling to put their theories to the test and make a prediction. When Paul Kennedy wrote "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" he was roundly criticised by his colleagues for predicting the soviet unions collapse. Without prediction, the theories of a field are meaningless.

Hence history is where I draw my line, it's fun to read but useless. Economics and philosophy are god tier humanities. Everything else is bunk.

the whole point of going to a university vs a college is that a university is supposed to mold you into a worldly person so that you don't make the same mistakes your father made when he came inside his sister.

I bet you think voting makes a difference.

humanities are pretty gr8, minus the obviously retarded shit like people squirting spaghetti-o's out of their anuses onto canvas and calling it art

obnoxious people who study the humanities are not so gr8. then again neither are smug autists who study a STEM area either

>>7680104
>predictions
>science
Choose one. Don't tell me you're into astrology.

I agree with your point on history, though. Literature is God-tier humanities in the end, because knowledge of literature means knowledge of history, economics, politics, and at the very least why the science of ____ period in ______ region was influential if not exactly how it was done.

>>7680164
Fucking idiot. Predictions are science.

>>7678064

human language gets boring

Here's why I feel that humanities courses, although interesting, don't hold a candle to STEM or even something like accounting or law that lets you make money.

>qualitative in nature
>doesn't require any real engagement with the subject matter before you get your magical piece of paper
>all humanities exams can be passed with only a day or two of studying (I've written philosophy papers drunk after reading the material for about 2 hours the night before, walked out in half the allocated time, and passed)
>it gives you no marketable skills
>it allows spoiled suburbanites to flaunt their perceived superiority because "lol colleddge grad xD"
>humanities publications and journals too often allow popularity of various authors and prevailing ideologies to influence their choices as to what gets published and what doesn't
>confirmation bias out the ass
>humanities students can't into simple stats and sampling
>idiots do basic BAs because they want to graduate and feel good about themselves and then get left with fuck tons of student debt and no skills that make them useful to employers
>faculties are always infested with "Muh soggy knees" SJW-types.
>humanities staff are almost invariably insufferable stuck-up assholes

Besides, what ever happened to just supplementing your STEM degree with some art/philosophy/music/writing/literature/etc. on your own time because you like those things?

Why do you have to have a BA to read and enjoy Shakespeare or paint some pretty fucking trees?

>>7680164
>predictions
>science.

I'm sorry dude, but I actually am a scientist, and I can assure you that prediction is pretty much the bedrock of science; it's essential to the entire enterprise. My brain literally hurts at your reply, maybe you should cease posting on this board for a while and lurk. I'm not trying to be an arsehole, but essentially you posting here, after this reply, is just increasing the noise:signal ratio

File: image.jpg (76KB, 471x800px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 471x800px

I don't. Learning new languages is fun, books are wonderful, and human civilization is richly varied.

I hate pompous humanities students.

>>7680208
Humanities departments are only full of shit because all the smart people don't want to do them because they think it's shit/won't make them money.

By smart people not joining these courses, dominating, and thus going on to become the faculty, we've guaranteed that the field is going to remain shit.

>>7680208

http://www.phil.cam.ac.uk/curr-students/ugrads-exam-folder/PartIIPaper7Mathlogicaftersetting.pdf

It's not possible to do these after studying 1 day with no previous exposure to the material.

File: DeusExHeliosEnd.jpg (481KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 1920x1200px

>>7678064
TRANSHUMANITY RULE
HUMANITY DROOL
WOOHOO

>>7680241
The poisson distribution is a lie.

>>7680208

As a /lit/ tourist this post is pretty much on the money. A large portion of people who take humanities courses are mediocre readers who do little if any serious reading of their own outside of coursework.

I've spoken to people who are studying/have studied English courses who really only read genre fiction in their spare time. They think of the canon as homework that they need to endure instead of being passionate enough to want to explore it. And they fucking study English...

I've literally had a female humanities student throw the "old dead white men" line at me when I was talking to her about authors. I thought she was trying to meme on me but she said it with complete seriousness.

The humanities are a sorry shitshow right now.

>>7678064
This isn't /sci/. Fuck off.
>>>/trash/
>>>/his/
>>>/b/

>>7680328
>implying there is a true ontological difference between a "natural" man and a man more keenly integraded with the works of man

The humanities are excellent, it's only due to poor presentation and stereotypes that anyone should come to dislike them. The university system nowadays pushes people towards either STEM or the humanities, and isolates them so that one side is completely separate from the other. This has brought the current scenario. I go on /lit/ usually, but getting more interested in math just through self-learning has been very enjoyable.

One real problem is that the idea of a classical education isn't feasible anymore, so a lot of people who do love the humanities aren't taking them because there's little career potential and you can study them without taking classes. It's what I plan on doing.

>>7680400
I'M GOING TO SKULLFUCK ALL PHILOSOPHERS WITH MY ROBODICK
WOOHOO

>>7680450
BUT THE PHILOSOPHERS ARE ALREADY CYBORGS AND THEY WROTE A PRETTY CONVINCING ETHOLOGY THAT THE CYBORG POLITICIANS ADAPTED AS CYBORG LAW AND NOW YOU'RE IN CYBORG JAIL.

I just fucking hate dumb ass philosophers and their problem of induction and shit. Like who the fuck cares, science is awesome and works--let's not study shit that doesn't even fucking matter, like when am I going to need to know about axioms when I'm older?

>but you can't know nuffin!
Who. The. Fuck. Cares. Science. Fucking. Works.

>>7680458
This. Nobody cares about what's 'philosophically' correct or whatever. If something is scientifically right, then it's fucking right. Humanities are just a bunch of intellectual masturbators.

>>7680458
>but you can't know nuffin!
Why are you reading philosophers that predate Plato? And where did you even get their writings? Or are you reading nothing but Russian deconstructionists?

I'm being facetious, of course. I know full well that you have never read a single piece of philosophical writing and have no idea what they look like or what they encompass.

>>7680481
I've seen enough posters on 4chan to know that philosophers are retards.

>>7680481
>hating on based heraclitus
i'll set your ass alight-us

>>7680488
Very scientific approach you got there.

Name one thing humanities and their people has ever done for science or society. Oh wait you can't.

>>7680458
>>but you can't know nuffin!

I'm a professional scientist that also enjoys reading philosophy. I also hate the "you can't know nuffin" line as a fairly disingenuous summary of what Descartes actually said. Descartes method was to start from a position of complete doubt, and move forward to see how much truth could really be gleaned. He immediately threw out all information from the senses, he knew that a dream state appeared completely real and yet was not, hence we had no reason to believe ANYTHING in this world was real.

However, his great insight was that even if this was all a dream there still had to be a dreamer- we can know for sure that even if everything else is a dream, we, as a conscious entity, existed- the position was famously summarised "I think therefore I am", or "cogito, ergo, sum"; and the argument is named the cogito.

So saying that the philosophical position is "you can't know nuffin" is wrong on the face of it, Descartes actually explicitly proved that you can know something- you can know yourself. At the same time, just spitting it out there as a way of poking fun at philosophy reveals you have absolutely no idea about the positions you're even critiquing in the first place.

>>7678064

Because our autism makes it hard for us to comprehend the underlying problems the humanities discuss, and we can't bear the fact that there is something hard than the shit (read: muh pure math, muh theoretical physics) we do since our self-esteem solely depends on that.

> guess I just explained 90% of posts on s
/sci/

>>7680706
>something hard than

harder

>>7680709
Erm, it's hard than; I was right you fucking idiot

I don't. I can't being an economics major. The people in humanities are delusional while people in STEM are smug. In reality, if you are a great and enjoyable person, you will find great and enjoyable people.

Tier list

>God tier
Philosophy
Classics
Economics

>Top tier
Law

>Mid Tier
English
Foreign languages
Foreign literature
Anthropology

>Low tier
Psychology
Creative writing
Geography

>Shit Tier
Sociology
Women's studies
Gender studies
African American studies/ Latino studies/ special snowflake studies.

Did i miss anything?

>>7678502
actually libarts is way cheaper to fund than engineering and science.

>>7682010
>Did i miss anything?
History

>>7678093
Philosophy's use of logic is infantile compared to modern data science's. Hard science beats everything else at anything worth measuring.

>>7678093
Philosophy is about asking retarded questions, half of the time unanswerable ones. My 3 year old kid does that pretty well.

>>7678439
This is a good way to put it, honestly.

>>7680072
Yea when there's only 3 runners in a race you obviously end up in the top 3

>>7682130
there's things like biology, business, wine tasting, that im not really interested in that's among the dozens of different things that were offered in my university. i feel that with mathematics, i've gotten a guideline on how to examine arguments and with the rest of humanities, that i realize that many of the ideas that you encounter everyday wasn't created in a vacuum and its interesting to see how it developed and give us a historical or philisophical context on why we see things or believe things or behave the way we do.

>>7678064

You means taught within a current university setting?

they breed racism/sexism and unironically call I justice. They claim to foster tolerance yet promote mob mentality and promote destruction of free speech.

"Safe spaces" my ass.

>>7682126
retarded questions lead to retarded answer, that's why the justification for a liberal democracy is retarded, or the argument against slavery is retarded, or atheism is retarded.

>>7678064
Because they're the last jobs the machines we've created will be able to replace. Thirty years from now they're going to have the last laugh and it's going to be miserable.

>>7682123
Bahahaha no. A philosophers use of logic is way better than a scientists. Of course, a scientist would have much better math.

>>7682113
Should be mid or top tier

>>7682183
>>Bahahaha no. A philosophers use of logic is way better than a scientists. Of course, a scientist would have much better math.
how do you know?

>>7678105
>However I don't see the purpose of studying something where your prime goal isn't to learn a specific thing, but rather to be able to discuss and motivate your choices.
So ... do you also not see the point in having a personality? Because having clearly thought out choice and motivation is basically just a way to refine your personality by exposing it to ideas.

Plz tell me you're just saying that you think it's a waste of time to study that in academic environments as opposed to self-study for personal enrichment (would make sense - school takes rigorous effort and money and spending either of those on developing your soul is kinda dubious unless you're family is loaded or something). Plzzzzzzz tell me you're not this bland and autistic.

>>7682183
>idealic logic
Simply not useful.

>>7682216

I think what that anon meant was that humanities courses often devolve into learning a few arguments and counterarguments so that you can write "the right thing" down in your finals

File: 1444282789311.png (29KB, 778x458px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 778x458px

>>7678064
STEMfags are too autistic to truly comprehend the world, so their sad little brains retreat into a world where only le scientific method matters. Not only do they live dull, joyless lifes, they want everyone else to be like that, too.

STEMfags have gone so far as to spit on the very idea of being "bewildered" by a "mystery", because it's really just a slightly more complex puzzle that gives out answers when you apply le scientific method.
In other words, if you're 'impressed' by some riddle of reality, you're a fucking retard who should not be.
Their ultimate goal is basically to rid humanity of emotion and make us all walking Spocks who have no comprehension of, say, aesthetics. This is why Nietzsche valued emotion over "logic", because he was as pissed at these fucking autistic, soulless subhumans as anyone else.

I remember Dawkins calling the meaning of life a "silly question to ask", because you can't empirically verify it. That about sums up STEMtards.

>>7682423
It may not be a silly question, but all the answers to it are bound to be silly.

That is, any answer beyond: "the purpose of life is to continue", is bound to be silly.

>>7682423
only a humanities faggot would think that people actually use the scientific method
that shit gets discontinued in fucking middle school

>>7678064
They're perfect for dumb frogposters.

>>7680164
You do realize that making an accurate prediction is the entire purpose behind science, right? It's a part of the fucking scientific method

>>7682423
>This is why Nietzsche valued emotion over "logic"
Nietzsche was bad at math, as are the most people who dismiss logic in favor of emotion.
I am saying that as someone who enjoys most of Nietzsche's work.

>>7682423
b8
>>7682485
counter-b8

>>7682423
>dull
>joyless
I can not even understand why or how you could say something like that about STEM. I'm no romantic, but I find it hard to not be bewildered by how much of our world hinges on the relation between acceleration and applied force. How can you think that anyone would put the immense amount of required effort into STEM if there was no joy to be derived? Why do you think "mystery" is nonexistant in STEM when "mystery" is what every scientist sees everyday?

>>7682896
Emotion overlaps heavily with logic. They're intertwined if not simply two sides of the same coin.

>>7678185
this nigga gets it

>>7678171
kek'd

>>7678093
It's easy in comparison to physics and math for me.

In physics and math, you often don't know the anwser, but have to logically figure out what is true.

The one (i'll grant you my sample size isn't large) philosophy class i took, gave us the anwsers, and told us how to be logical about it. So all I had to do was reverse engineer an essay.

Essentially ive trained myself to always think logically, so when it's tensor notation vs. an essay with a given prompt, philosophy is just plain easier, for me.

>>7682901
They are still distinct in a way. Also, most people that follow logic are way more successful than most people that follow emotion.

>>7678443
People who study humanities think of life differently from us scientists.

We think of "important" as solving problems, figuring the world out how the world works and making the world better for future generations.

Humanities are more concerned with understanding the human condition and studying why we are the way we are.

So even though I agree that your prof was stretching it a bit, some people think that anwsering what it means to enjoyr your life is more important than solving disease #546

File: Francis_Lewis.jpg (14KB, 200x254px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 200x254px

Not entirely sure what humanities entails but I am assuming it includes thing's like writing, oratory and art. I saw logic, as well (though some are much more logical than others, by nature)

I think if you "hate" the humanities you're just an edgy bitch

They serve there purpose, as it is it's own field. If it weren't useful, in some way, there would be no schooling.

>>7682213
Err, I'm a scientist? You know there are guys with actual STEM degrees who have submitted actual research papers to actual peer reviewed journals on this board, yes?

>>7682423
>People who don't think like me can't possibly have any enjoyment in their lives, because they don't like the things that bring me joy!

>Why should I make sure that anything I claim can be proven and observed? That part is hard, and I'd rather solve all of life's mysteries just by thinking about them without actually verifying if they work in any kind of objective matter! People who don't just accept my claims without a shred of evidence to back them up are just stupid robots incapable of independent thought!

>>7682423
>Stop solving mysteries with science and math before you put philosophers out of a job!

>>7678064
This >>7682960 is the reason.

>>7678064

I dont hate them, that would imply I care. To me they're just insignificant and ant-like.

>>7682423
wtf is this?

>>7683014
See
>>7682975
and
>>7682977
for translation.

>>7678064
I hate things that are subjective (aka autism)

>>7683037
>I'm doing only qualitative research because statistics is too hard.

>>7683037
How is autism subjective? Diagnostic interviews are conducted by trained professionals. They must meet a threshold score on the ados and the adi. Then further cognitive and perceptual quantitative tests can be done to examine the influence of diagnostic status and as a check against the diagnosis.

>>7683076
I meant that I hate humanities because I have autism

File: 1444473356258.jpg (189KB, 1317x960px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1317x960px

Hume vehemently opposes the view, held by philosophers before him (and after him), that to act morally is have a rational grasp of moral truths. He defends an instrumental conception of practical reason, according to which the role of reason is only to find out which means helps achieve a given goal. Reason (or the intellect) plays no part in determining the goals. Our goals are set exclusively by what Hume calls the passions and what today is most often called desires. Desires cannot be evaluated as true or false or as reasonable or unreasonable - they are "original existences" in our mind and arise from unknown natural causes. We cannot be criticized rationally for our desires (As Hume remarks, it is "not contrary to reason to prefer the destruction of the whole world to the scratching of my finger" (p 416)).

Reason is the slave of the passions in the sense that practical reason alone cannot give rise to moral motivation; it is altogether dependent on pre-existing desires that furnish motivational force. For Hume, this is not a fact we should lament (as moralists do) but a basic fact about our psychology.

>>7680104
>Without prediction, the theories of a field are meaningless.

This is correct. However, does a discipline have to present theories to possess societal merit? I understand having gripes with things like sociology, because it pretends to be a science, but aren't things like musical composition and history important for reasons entirely outside of science's (admittedly bountiful) utilities?

File: neet_philosophy.png (103KB, 1437x908px)

103KB, 1437x908px

>all these folks arguing STEM vs humanities for the millionth time
>still not realizing the best way is to become an enlightened NEET polymath
fools, all of you

>>7680675
The cogito's the most famous thing attributed to him, but the justification is always conviniently ignored. The thing that brings him back to reality and to accept the majority of the things that didn't pass his method of doubt in the beginning of the meditations is that he thinks God is a nice guy and wouldn't decieve him like that. He's willing to throw inductive reasoning all to shit and use religious faith as his basis for existing. That's functionally useless now. Its fine if you want to know the historical train of thought that led us to where we are in science, but don't think there's even a piece of usable shit in there anymore.

>>7682423
>Can't see it, isn't there
Because philosophers built the electron microscope?

>I have a theory
>Let's try to understand it (without bothering to see if it corresponds to physical reality or can be verified by objective means. That stuff isn't important.)

Nice pic, anon. Don't let facts stand in the way of spreading ignorance.

File: 1448248126124.jpg (642KB, 2749x3242px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 2749x3242px

>>7678064
Because the board is full of undergrads that criticize other careers in order to make what they study "harder", and thus show themselves smarter than others.
The comments on humanities here don't go deeper than Neil Degrasse Tyson or Dawkins critiques, all of which naive with no much knowledge of humanities as it has been pointed out.

This said, I studied math and philosophy and college, and I like humanities and humanities people better. While most of each is fairly unaware of what the others are doing, it has been more common for stem students to talk about philosophy, politics, literature, and humanities in general, with no more knowledge than a highschool kid could have.

>>7680675
>I also hate the "you can't know nuffin" line as a fairly disingenuous summary of what Descartes actually said.
I don't like it either, but it bears little relation with Descartes.
It is mostly a commentary to Hume, that along with Feyerabend, is the less loved philosophers by scientists. Both provide sound arguments and criticism of scientific method, and unless we take the naive answer of the post you quoted ("who cares? it works") the whole system falls down.
Kant developed the middle-road between rationalism (Descartes, Leibniz) and empiricism (Hume, Locke) solving most of those problems. Not surprisingly, the knowledge of most scientists of philosophy seems to be reduced to Hume induction problem (while unaware of the rest of empiricism) and some guys from the vienna circle.

>>7683130
what the fuck is a roastie?

>>7683185
Roast Potatoes

>>7683189
they should be on the right because they are delicious

>>7683173
I'd say they knowledge is reduced to Sokal's paper and some shit tier methodology books. Every single fucking time in these threads:

>le scientific method
>verification principle XDD
>muh objective knowledge :-DDDD
>it works its true

Just wait til the analytic philosophy retards start posting and this thread is fucking done.

>>7683314
There are good analytic philosophers too. Although good philosophers are hard to place as analytic or continental, the line between the two traditions is blurry and both sides are now taking more things of the other.

>>7680628
give me a reason not to kill myself
after my undergraduate, when i realized i didn't enjoy research, i was near suicide, as my whole life until that point was focusing on beomcing a prof. had i not found that i loved literature i might've killed myself

>>7680628
Discourse of the Method. French revolution.

I study philosophy and religion, along with history on my own freetime.

I can usually keep up with any history Buff, I'm usually more studied than those who study religion in a school and i'm alright at philosophy.

You have literally no reason to go to a school to learn these three.

Now mathematics, physics and the like, that needs schooling. That isn't so easily learned by yourself.

>>7683613
>Now mathematics, physics and the like, that needs schooling. That isn't so easily learned by yourself.
I disagree, and I personally did the opposite. Unless the books are read in dilettante-mode, most of what is written cannot be understood without knowing its proper context, and sometimes even then misunderstood (nietzsche is a prime example of this).
The possibility of multiple readings without knowing the complete background, 99/100 wrong because of some obscure reason 20ish could hardly know, is what I think, makes a teacher necessary.

I found math easier in the sense that you can learn it alone. Read the theory and solve the exercises. Take as much time as reading and writing philosophy seriously, but thanks to the formality there is hardly place to misinterpretation.

Physics and other disciplines are a different matter. Any serious studies of these eventually involves equipment that one does not necessarily have.

ok tell me about achievements of philosophy
because theres a fuckton of philosophers, but what did you actually figure out throughout these 3000 years

File: jade-mask-rio-azul.jpg (178KB, 470x580px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 470x580px

I don't. Archaeology, anthropology and linguistics are cool and use methods as scientific as biology or geology.

On the other hand, stuff like psychology, art or literature are bullshit because they are too subjective.

>>7678064
I don't because I'm not some Newtonian autist who tries to shit all over Leibniz and Godel.

I know that Math has been historically intertwined with Philosophy and so I respect and enjoy Philosophy.

>>7683665
I don't know, modern Mathmetics and Science? Math and Science were always apart of Philosophy until the Enlightenment Era.

>>7683665
>because theres a fuckton of philosophers, but what did you actually figure out throughout these 3000 years

Logic, the scientific method, democracy, universal human rights...

>>7683717
>art or literature are bullshit
pleb detected

>>7682900
>How can you think that anyone would put the immense amount of required effort into STEM if there was no joy to be derived?

Because they are autistic?
Just look at Eliezer Yudkowsky. Yes he literally believes you are stupid for being "mystified" and has this "lol its just chemicals in your brain you stupid homo sapien" mentality.
I've gotten the same vibe from le black science man, also.

>>7683665
It gave us science and logic.
Have some respect for the mother of science.

>>7683834
Didn't Marx figure out that we would have gotten those things anyway?

>>7684100
>Marx
>Figuring out anything

>>7683717
>art or literature are bullshit because they are too subjective.
...what the fuck is wrong with you autists?

When you talk to people, do you just list off objective facts or do you speak about your subjective experience (feelings, interests, life stories, etc)? Humanities is just the sharpening and shaping of that impulse.

...actually that's a stupid question; you probably literally have so little to share with your fellow humans that you actually do sound like a shrill, monotone voice reading off encyclopedia articles, MAYBE accentuated with the occasional arrogant snicker or mocking comment. Thank fucking god you STEM autists make capitalism work because you fuckers would be kicked out of society were technology irrelevant.

>>7678064
Highly over saturated with morons. And I don't respect morons. Simple as that.

If you are spiritually dead it really doesn't matter what we invent. You won't feel anything beyond base emotions. Better to be a wild animal in the jungle than a state of the art emotionless robot in the Star Trek Universe.

Even Lieutenant Commander Data understood this.

>>7678064
more like jewmantities

i actually like most of them, except for the corrupting leftist taint which ruins everything. as a result i lean more towards writing (which I am bad at) and music (which I am worse at)

>>7683834
It did not. Fucking Ohms law was still controversial becuase he experimented used an experiment to build of a theory of nature. This is 19th century bruh, philosophers just stopped rambling when they saw the massive amount of results experimental science produced.

>>7684123
You waste many words.

>>7684200
I don't know what you're talking about.
Could you be more clear please?

Personally I was referring to the fall of medieval philosophy and the subsequent birth of science, that was prompted by Bacon's Novum Organum and Descartes' Discourse and Treatises. This is XVII century.

>>7684200
You do realize that science was basically a philosophical thought experiment until it gained its own momentum, right? We have Bacon and Locke to thank for science almost as much as Newton and Galileo (well ... not even near as much but it probably wouldn't have happened without them.)

>>7684210
So do you. So am I, currently. We're on 4chan; all these words are wasted.

>>7684217
The words in your head.

>>7684233
You do realize I'm only responding to you because this site is distraction porn, right? Please don't tell me you're here for any other reason than that; I'd die from sympathetic shock.

File: 1438269071617.jpg (855KB, 1936x2776px) Image search: [Google]

855KB, 1936x2776px

>>7395410
Actual scientist here, if you don't want to look like a moron at your first seminar, you should know that the research of "truth" has mostly been left behind by actual science a long time ago. Academia is very much in majority positivist, and not realist. In other words, who cares about truth, empirical adequacy is more than enough. In fact, abandoning the search for truth has proven mostly fruitful. There is a whole field still devoted to the search for actual truth, it's called interpretations of quantum mechanics. And guess what, nobody cares about it, because all those interpretations turn out the same empirical predictions, and that makes "truth" a matter of philosophical investigation, not a scientific one.

If you really think that scientific models describe a reality and are not just tools of empirical adequacy, you're gonna have to explain to me just how you believe an operator is an actual physical entity.

this and the best part is that those scientist do not even know why adequacy of predictions matters, but it does not stop them to ask for money.
the scientists are the best scammers.

>>7678064
Lots of essay writing cramps my hand up

>>7684200
>philosophers just stopped rambling when they saw the massive amount of results experimental science produced.
this is right. scientists are just here to produce experiments. it is pure sterility.

>>7684200
Experimental science ain't shit without math which was invented by philosophers as science was.

>>7683092
Underrated post

>>7678064
Regardless of my feeling towards the humanities, I've got one serious question for anyone who is studying or has studied for a humanities degree.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOUR CAREERS PROSPECTS?

I don't mean that as bait, or in any disingenuous way, I genuinely have no fucking clue what your prospectus are.

>>7683100

Those fields may well have the utilities you mentioned, however that would be outside the point I was trying to make. The OP asked why do I hate humanities. I replied that there are some that I enjoy and see as useful, such as economics and philosophy, some I enjoy and see as useless such as history, and then a whole heap that I think are crap.

The issue I have with history, in a way, is that it really does try to pretend to be a science. It will make a claim, for example, the treaty of Versailles was overly punitive and aroused the Germans to anger, but insufficiently punitive to ensure that Germany would never again threaten Europe with war, hence causing ww2. So far so rosy, let's test that hypothesis with an experiment, impose a similarly punitive treaty on Iran after a war with Iraq, and see if a second middle eastern war results. I'm being slightly facetious, but one already knows the reaction of professional historians to this suggestion- they would critique every part of it, highlighting the differences between Germany and Iran, the context, etc etc, essentially running from any attempt to use their data to make a testable prediction. The reality is they have no idea why the Second World War started, but in the absence of testable predictions, they can continue on merrily writing away, happy in tenureship, adding absolutely nothing of value to the human condition. I like history, really I do, I find it a wonderful hobby, but damn if it isn't academias biggest waist of time.

>>7678064
Whoever hates the humanities is probably an idiotic STEMfag, the same way whoever hates STEM is an idiot.
Everyone with a brain who's not a teenager is able to understand the immense value of both humanities and STEM and, while being more interested or gifted in one or the other, should strive to learn at least the basics of both.

And why can't you not like both the humanities and the sciences? One is not better than the other. If you want to truly understand the world, they go hand in hand.

>>7684908
because I need to validate my choice of life to feel less like the autistic kid I am

>>7678064
Humanities is good. The only bad humanities are the ones that brainwash students into a political side using opinions they claim as facts. Like radical feminism

File: ok get in.png (317KB, 490x364px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 490x364px

>>7682010
>Foreign Languages and Psychology rated that low

>>7685829

Considering foreign languages are just a matter of consolidating translators for the rest of us..

>>7678064
i don't, but i would never major in it

people seem to be under the impression that they're going to uni to get an education, when really they're doing it to get a job

better have a game plan if you're going in humanities or academia

>>7678064

Well, science and humanities always benefitted each other and spiraled up together through world history. It is no coincidence that especially during a time where science made biggest breakthroughs, humanities equally did. The biggest scientists of the old world were philosophers, artists and scientists at the same time, which is not just some lifestyle choice either. I do not know why there is this duality between humanities and STEM, I always thought that both things are interessting and important. I just chose engineering because there are actuall skills to be learned which are difficult to master alone, while I read and draw a ton by myself.

Also this buttblasted humanities fag who calls everyone able to solve a second grade polynomial an autist should kill himself desu.

>>7682010
Tier list

>God tier
Economics

>Top tier
Law
History

>Mid Tier
Sociology
Psychology
Anthropology
Geography
Political Science

>Low tier
English
Foreign languages
Foreign literature
Creative writing

>Shit Tier
Any other arts
Religion
Classics
Philosophy
Women's studies
Gender studies
African American studies/ Latino studies/ special snowflake studies.

I'm EE and I love literature, philosophy and history. Its just that there are too many bullshit humanity degrees available and in general we don't need as many humanities graduates as STEM ones. But humanities definitely have their role in society and I respect that.

>>7680322
You are not wrong, but I hope that you are trolling. That's the worst possible example you could have used.

> Humanities is easy, STEM is hard
> That's not true, look at this Humanities exam on a course that's as close to a STEM course as possible! It's also hard!

I think your argument actually supports >>7680208 point.

>>7678064
I'm a chemistry grad student with a bachelor of arts, major in English. fite me. Humanities are great if just for the fact that they teach you how to write well, which is indispencable in science as your main job is to churn out publishable papers. It really surprised me when I started research how bad most scientist are at writing.

Because Socrates was a bitch.

>>7686226
Maybe we don't need technology at all.

>>7686247
Socrates would troll your fool ass right out of any forum you dared step into.

>>7686214
Your mom's a Shit tier.

>>7686250
Nigga fuck Socrates.

>>7686249
why post on 4chan then? shouldn't you be living in the woods?

>>7686252
Knowing ancient Greece, you very well might have gotten your wish.

>>7686249
Except that we actually need it.

>>7686255
Society doesn't permit me to live off the land without ownership. Sadly. Like they will literally lock yo ass up if they find you living in the mountains.

>>7686257
Homosex ayy

>>7686259
Tell that to the mofos living thousands of years- okay yeah they might be like hell yeah we need it.

Even though we don't. Dramatic DUNDUNDUNNN

>>7686262
Are you seriously comparing humans to fungi?
I hope this is b8

>>7686259
>math is necessary, it gives us planes and computers, otherwise we would live miserably like animals !


nice terrorism

>>7686264
Bro where the fuck did your mind conjur a comparison between fungi and humans from >>7686262 ?

I'm genuinely curious. Like what in the double fuck

>>7686276
>Tell that to the mofos living thousands of years- okay yeah they might be like hell yeah we need it

>>7686283
This is why we need humanities, this guy has the interpretations skills of a dog...

>>7686311
>>7686283
Tell that to the mofos living thousands of years prior to the advent of technology

BITCH.

File: 1436483075467s.jpg (12KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 250x250px

>>7686313

>>7686320
https://longawkwardpause.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/baka.jpg

>>7678064
Because I hate myself deep down.

>>7683229
Leave this board you potato-eating peasant!

>>7686214
>philosophy
>shit tier
>history
>not shit tier

Pls be troll.

>>7684123

I'm nit against the subjectivity itself.

I want to learn about the world because I find it beautiful and whwn I do this I want to find the truth about the world. Obviously truth is objective.

>>7682113
Bottom tier at best, and historians are extremely pretentious.

File: 1389303243396.png (242KB, 550x578px)

242KB, 550x578px

I love some aspects of humanities, public health, etc.

but most are complete arse

>>7683076
Everything is subjective desu.

Objective knowledge is impossible. Even logic is based on the idea that it (subjectively) seems reasonable.

>>7684858
Anyone?

>>7684858
1. I studied both humanities and stem. No problem there.

2. There are jobs for humanities major, but less than stem. If you're academically good, you shouldn't have a problem to get a job; if you're not, you probably should pick another major.

3. The question is too broad, so I'll give a broad answer: research.
You obviously need a PhD for that, so four years of college is not going to make it. Once you get into graduate school you realize that undergraduate education is like kindergarten - you only get some tools and they test some ability to use them.

>>7684858
I studied film.
To be honest, my prospects were same before and after give or take the college graduate bias employers have. There's always jobs in film because films are always in demand.

That being said, college gave me the chance to make stuff that would later impress potential employers and clients thanks to the fact that I didn't have to buy any equipment.

>>7686339
potatoes is where all the real niggas get their carbs

>>7680160
this

>>7678064
Asking that question: IS PHILOSOPHY.
Answering this question: IS PHILOSOPHY.
I hate this board.

>>7678185
>>7678423
As a humanity, this

>>7686214
Obviously doesn't know what philosophy is, the post.

>>7683717
>art or literature are bullshit
Are you legitimately autistic? Not even trying to be mean, I'm just curious how somebody could find culture worthless.

>>7684858
Anything really. I'm open to a career in journalism, civil service, entertainment, or marketing/advertising. I have experience and skills in all of those areas, so I expect that finding a job in a couple years won't be too difficult.

A good quarter of humanities students are pre-law, though.