Did you go to college/university or anything?

[DMC]

What difference does that make? Let me put it to you this way: harmonic analysis in both the continuous and discrete sense is easey peasey.

I was looking for this "multiple people" claim you made. Is that some Fuzzy math? So you're an RF engineer. Just say so.

You have pretty much abandoned the premise of your argument and have resorted to the degree epeen nonsense that your argument was based off of in the first place. Is your entire objective only to denigrate an entire group of people in general?

I abandoned all of it because I proved my point already. The rest is just the post game analysis by Fuzzy.

Now i am sure that you have an ME or something. Lord knows I have read enough of your autoeroticism about it but now your are going after the idea of a liberal arts degree. Not even with remote specificity. it's not even zero sum. I realize that you are not even going to address what you are saying on merits. It's just oddly motivated behavior.

And you are going to fret about it no doubt with your usual "look at me" blowhard antics as if that even causes me to raise an eyebrow. Ad homs are common place everywhere, yours are not special so spare me the righteous indignation.

[DMC]

The two notions aren't mutually exclusive, lil peeps. it was clear what you were doing: even the venerable Feynman has contempt for your field of study. gmafb. You can hardly put together an argument on merit. That is obvious.

I never discuss my education in particular. I talk about topics and subjects that I am well versed but i don't ever sit there and compare my EE with anyone else's background. At the same time when the papers he is criticizing are basing their predictions on PDE's and he criticizes them then I think its pretty ing germane that he doesn't even know what a PDE is much less how to evaluate one.

Yeah yeah, you tell WC that he's the flunkie that does what you tell him to do, that you are the one making the checklists for him to follow. You're saying "I have a degree and you don't". Again, hypocrite.

There is a difference between understanding the background of an individual and where that puts him in relation to knowledge with the subject at hand and what you are doing. You are trying to make some weird hierarchy of worth with what you consider desirable fields of study and then everything else. I just think WC is an idiot.

Liberal Arts are the most desirable hands down, by the student. That's why the stats show that only half of those who finish with a liberal arts major actually started with one while over 90 percent of engineering majors who finish actually started in that major. No one transfers to engineering. It's a supply/demand thing in the work force, and all those people transferring to liberal arts majors have to compete with each other over a limited number of jobs, and those jobs don't pay well because of it. Liberal arts is therefore a ty major. I did mention that I would love to major in something I don't need to earn money with, that would be much more desirable than the alternative. Fun classes are great, I would guess.

WC is an idiot. The world is full of them. That doesn't justify your actions. Is it your job to put every idiot in his place by beating him down with your degree? No. It's not mine either, I just do it as a hobby.

[DMC]

it's not at all a culture for females to take those humanity majors, it's just a trend in recent years when more and more females make their ways into colleges. women should never be given the access to school because a good woman's workshop is always in the kitchen and kitchen only. just because most females happen to choose majors like art, literature, history etc... and up these majors it doesn't mean those majors are naturally secondary imho. in the universities of the 19th century there were no such majors like finance, accounting, engineering etc...

100 years ago you wouldn't be in school in America either so that's not a good reference point bro.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I was looking for this "multiple people" claim you made. Is that some Fuzzy math? So you're an RF engineer. Just say so.

I abandoned all of it because I proved my point already. The rest is just the post game analysis by Fuzzy.

And you are going to fret about it no doubt with your usual "look at me" blowhard antics as if that even causes me to raise an eyebrow. Ad homs are common place everywhere, yours are not special so spare me the righteous indignation.

Your posts are a study in irony. 'I won but youre a blowhard' now? I'm righteous? Hypocrite much?

One thing is for certain you hae no interest in arguing based on merits. You don't even try. Multiple people just last night would be sbm, lm and myself while yourself doesn't represent a plural in any way shape or form.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yeah yeah, you tell WC that he's the flunkie that does what you tell him to do, that you are the one making the checklists for him to follow. You're saying "I have a degree and you don't". Again, hypocrite.

I am talking about occupation and not education and again, this had severe implications on his credibility to comment at the discussion at hand. You have even discussed this at length yourself. It's clear that he has no background You've turned this discussion about whether or someone went to school into my degree is better than your degree. You try to apint me as doing the same thing but you lack an understanding of the idea of approach.

Liberal Arts are the most desirable hands down, by the student. That's why the stats show that only half of those who finish with a liberal arts major actually started with one while over 90 percent of engineering majors who finish actually started in that major. No one transfers to engineering. It's a supply/demand thing in the work force, and all those people transferring to liberal arts majors have to compete with each other over a limited number of jobs, and those jobs don't pay well because of it. Liberal arts is therefore a ty major. I did mention that I would love to major in something I don't need to earn money with, that would be much more desirable than the alternative. Fun classes are great, I would guess.

WC is an idiot. The world is full of them. That doesn't justify your actions. Is it your job to put every idiot in his place by beating him down with your degree? No. It's not mine either, I just do it as a hobby.

I don't see how that implies causation. I transferred to engineering once I realized that I did not like biochem or rather the lab work associated with it. Engineering is fun for me as is math in general. All your presumptions are self centered and small minded. And you are supporting a bandwagon fallacy or the inverse of one. Few do it so it must be coveted. All you are doing here is demonstrating that cash is your metric for 'desirability.' You do absolutely nothing to imply causation and everything that you are a failed elitist.

One thing that i do find sad is that your measure of 'desirability' is financial. Why didn't you just leave it at the post of average starting salaries. You don't even apply the principles of the disciplines you are espousing. You talk about 'liberal arts' or 'Feynman says' instead of the inaccuracies inherent within the approach. if I was trying to make your argument then i would talk about soft sciences like psychiatry where they design drugs around poor at best understanding and the inherent risks or wholisitc economic theories and it's litany of failures. But at the end of the day I personally find the pursuit of truth to be the most desirable pursuit.

That's the thing though i don't think that you are as base as you claim. Either that or you are obviously but I hope for the best. What i get instead of what you are claiming is more of an existential crisis. You probably have a number of experiences you could play off of as to why an empirical science is better but you resort to money? Just sounds to me like other justifications have not been much satisfaction to you.

Talk about how engineering is where the rubber meets the road in terms of the realization of the rational constructs of math or physics is the closest approximation of reality as it relates to the mind. Because when it comes down to it if the best you can come up with for desirability is it's difficult and makes you more money that rings absolutely hollow to me.

I did like the part where you claim winning in a discussion of what is the most desirable personal pursuit though.

[DMC]

Why did you write a book on your feelings about my opinions? Did I touch a nerve? It is what it is, I didn't make it that way. I just pointed it out. Don't shoot the messenger.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Why did you write a book on your feelings about my opinions? Did I touch a nerve? It is what it is, I didn't make it that way. I just pointed it out. Don't shoot the messenger.

more elitist fail from the failed elitist

It's called being articulate. I try and be intelligent and thoughtful. You should try it, yappy.

[DMC]

more elitist fail from the failed elitist

It's called being articulate. I try and be intelligent and thoughtful. You should try it, yappy.

Shouldn't you be off trying to be interesting, creative, ironic and saving bisexuals from the truth?

Wait.... nm

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Shouldn't you be off trying to be interesting, creative, ironic and saving bisexuals from the truth?

Wait.... nm

butthurt and yappy

[DMC]

butthurt and yappy

Unoriginal PowderPuff Girl seeks Google Maps Triangulation Expert for exchanging of bright ideas and ankle biting cards.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Unoriginal PowderPuff Girl seeks Google Maps Triangulation Expert for exchanging of bright ideas and ankle biting cards.

still butthurt and yappy

FuzzyLumpkins is not one of the PPG.

hating on me because I enjoyed the show back in the day.

you are going to have to try harder than that.

Seriously though do you have any justification for the empirical sciences beyond financial considerations?

[DMC]

Yes. We aren't living in caves any more. I love art, love music, love literature, but we advance through science. When hits the fan, no one is going to be trying to find a librarian or most liberal arts related professionals. They will try to find doctors, engineers, tradesmen and scientists. Sure, individually our lives are enriched through the arts, however they are, as I described before, luxuries, not necessities. Some may cross function, however for the most part all of the "WTF" degrees are in liberal arts. You talk about a science degree and it's unnecessary to even discuss it's usefulness. You have to do some wrangling to equate many of the arts degrees to anything useful.

By "useful" I mean anything other than making you feel better about yourself.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So when the world collapses you might be important. That's interesting if you think about it.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

i would counter your assertion that it comes down to what people value. and not some objective proof.

it's the difference between the Romans and the Greeks. The Romans were known for their engineering and being a void of philosophy and art. Many people find the Greeks more significant for leaving a mark AND contributing to the arts and philosophy.

I would also point to the collapse of the Roman empire. I would argue that the monastic orders that preserved ancient texts were more important to the recovery of mankind then the guys that knew how to make aqueducts and arches.

[DMC]

i would counter your assertion that it comes down to what people value. and not some objective proof.

What people (plural as in other people) value is reflected in the demand. What the individual values is the ability to pursue dreams while sustaining a lifestyle. Some put the pursuit of dreams ahead of the sustaining part and some never had to consider sustaining a lifestyle as they had it in the bag from inheritance so now they are just perusing in a Jethro Bodine like manner, wonder what they will become today, street car conductor or brain surgeon.

it's the difference between the Romans and the Greeks. The Romans were known for their engineering and being a void of philosophy and art. Many people find the Greeks more significant for leaving a mark AND contributing to the arts and philosophy.

As a nation perhaps, and to those who look back (historians, another liberal art) but to those cutting the path to new designs and ideas, cures and such, the arts are just a diversion.

I would also point to the collapse of the Roman empire. I would argue that the monastic orders that preserved ancient texts were more important to the recovery of mankind then the guys that knew how to make aqueducts.

Perhaps, but what was in those texts that was important? Mankind would have died quickly were it not for science. Plagues would have killed us all had we sat around thinking of things to argue about and writing plays.

[CuckingFunt]

Yes. We aren't living in caves any more. I love art, love music, love literature, but we advance through science. When hits the fan, no one is going to be trying to find a librarian or most liberal arts related professionals. They will try to find doctors, engineers, tradesmen and scientists. Sure, individually our lives are enriched through the arts, however they are, as I described before, luxuries, not necessities. Some may cross function, however for the most part all of the "WTF" degrees are in liberal arts. You talk about a science degree and it's unnecessary to even discuss it's usefulness. You have to do some wrangling to equate many of the arts degrees to anything useful.

As you have been throughout this thread, you are once again arguing your own individual values as if they're universal. They're not.

I, personally, find the arts to be absolutely essential specifically because of they way they enrich our lives and our culture. And I know that I'm not alone in that thought. However, those are my personal values. I would never even attempt to argue that my point of view is, or even should be, seen as objective truth.

Nor would I need to for the purpose of this thread. Your original argument was that liberal arts degrees are easy and that they don't lead to jobs. That's factually inaccurate. Point blank. And several people have pointed that out to you in this very thread. I make no claims of being the poster child for liberal arts education, but using my own experience/choices as an example, my graduate program was incredibly rigorous required just as much of my hard work and dedication that a science or engineering degree would have. Additionally, the choices I've made have been because I early on identified a specific career I wanted to pursue and have since been taking the steps necessary to qualify me for that career. I'm not pursuing the liberal arts or an MLIS because I'm floundering or because I lack the drive to do something else.

If you think I've made dumb choices or that I've picked a dumb career, you're en led to think so. But all you've done so far in this thread is think so. You've done absolutely zero to effectively argue the pointlessness of my degrees or of any other liberal arts degrees/career choices.

[DMC]

So when the world collapses you might be important. That's interesting if you think about it.

I'll never be important on a global scale, but the sciences certainly will be. In fact, a box of .22 rounds would be worth more than a pound of gold. That's a bit on the extreme end, but salary reflects the importance of the role for most things. I think teachers are more important than their salaries reflect and coaches should make less, but from a supply/demand perspective it is what it is.

[DMC]

As you have been throughout this thread, you are once again arguing your own individual values as if they're universal. They're not.

When my personal opinion is asked, it doesn't need to be universal to include it in my response. However philosophy never cured a disease or repaired a wound and it never found better ways to farm, or made better structures in which to live. If you had a child and that child became ill, would you seek out an artist or would you go to a doctor. Personal desire to learn is one thing, but don't equate that to global value. Many economies cannot even support their own people so they are starving. Do you suppose philosophy and art will help? Should someone from Studies go over there and explain how sexuality and heterosexuality can coexist in harmony or should someone show them how to manage crops, treat the wounded and deal in pre and post natal care? Just curious.

I, personally, find the arts to be absolutely essential specifically because of they way they enrich our lives and our culture. And I know that I'm not alone in that thought. However, those are my personal values. I would never even attempt to argue that my point of view is, or even should be, seen as objective truth.

Sure, and dessert enriches our meal. It's not going to be the main course. Objective truth is that we can find time for arts but not without science. The reverse is not true. Without science we are too busy trying to stay alive and burying our plague ridden dead.

Nor would I need to for the purpose of this thread. Your original argument was that liberal arts degrees are easy and that they don't lead to jobs. That's factually inaccurate. Point blank. And several people have pointed that out to you in this very thread. I make no claims of being the poster child for liberal arts education, but using my own experience/choices as an example, my graduate program was incredibly rigorous required just as much of my hard work and dedication that a science or engineering degree would have. Additionally, the choices I've made have been because I early on identified a specific career I wanted to pursue and have since been taking the steps necessary to qualify me for that career. I'm not pursuing the liberal arts or an MLIS because I'm floundering or because I lack the drive to do something else.

Not easy, ty. I said they are ty and they are. They are certainly easier than science degrees. Sure you can cherry pick one liberal arts degree and one science degree and try to argue those, but the fact that people drop into liberal arts and out of engineering and science degrees needs to be examined and at least considered as a sign of difficulty in science, and that the liberal arts, though not easy compared to doing nothing, are easier for 50% of the graduates who dropped in along the way (not considering that some did so out of desire instead of necessity).

If you think I've made dumb choices or that I've picked a dumb career, you're en led to think so. But all you've done so far in this thread is think so. You've done absolutely zero to effectively argue the pointlessness of my degrees or of any other liberal arts degrees/career choices.

I didn't say you made dumb choices. I said you have ty degrees. There's nothing dumb about not wanting to work in science. , I would prefer to do something flighty and self serving because I am a greedy person, but alas I must make a living.



edited quote tags.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What people (plural as in other people) value is reflected in the demand. What the individual values is the ability to pursue dreams while sustaining a lifestyle. Some put the pursuit of dreams ahead of the sustaining part and some never had to consider sustaining a lifestyle as they had it in the bag from inheritance so now they are just perusing in a Jethro Bodine like manner, wonder what they will become today, street car conductor or brain surgeon.

As a nation perhaps, and to those who look back (historians, another liberal art) but to those cutting the path to new designs and ideas, cures and such, the arts are just a diversion.

Perhaps, but what was in those texts that was important? Mankind would have died quickly were it not for science. Plagues would have killed us all had we sat around thinking of things to argue about and writing plays.

All you have done is shown the significance of historians: another liberal art.

And despite the greatness of the Romans technological achievements of the Romans the plagues did kill us. what do the historians say: 1/4 of the population of Europe died duing both the pneumonic and bubonic plagues.

We were doing neither the liberal arts nor the sciences. Both played a role in the recovery though.

I am trying to find your idea of 'individual values' beyond sustaining a lifestyle.

So far we have you will help if there is a collapse which is just sustaining a lifestyle.

And I would also discuss some of the B.S. degrees that have very little pragmatic purpose. Take particle physics. One quote that will always stick out to me was of Leon Lederman speaking before the Congressional Budget Committee in the mid-1980s explaining to them why the Waxahachie particle collider was worth building. He said in response to a question in how the thing would further civilization as it had no real pragmatic value. I don't remember the exact quote but he responded that it was because the pursuit of such knowledge is what made a civilization worth having. I think he is right.

There are others, I was reading a paper that described how a mathematician had proven some equation held true for all prime numbers and according to scientific american it wsa some significant advance in number theory. To you that's worthless compared to something that might get you a $500/hr consulting fee.

Just seems artificial, stark and cynical to me.

[silverblk mystix]

DMC: "I am so proud to be a trained monkey and I am a more sophisticated trained monkey than other trained monkeys!!!!"

[CuckingFunt]

Objective truth is that we can find time for arts but not without science. The reverse is not true.

Have I at any point argued against the importance of the sciences?

I still don't understand why you're so attached to the idea that only one of these things can be important at a time.

Not easy, ty. I said they are ty and they are. They are certainly easier than science degrees. Sure you can cherry pick one liberal arts degree and one science degree and try to argue those, but the fact that people drop into liberal arts and out of engineering and science degrees needs to be examined and at least considered as a sign of difficulty in science, and that the liberal arts, though not easy compared to doing nothing, are easier for 50% of the graduates who dropped in along the way (not considering that some did so out of desire instead of necessity).

The assumption that all, or even a majority, of the people who abandon the sciences for a liberal arts degree do so because the latter is easier is an awfully big one.

I didn't say you made dumb choices. I said you have ty degrees. There's nothing dumb about not wanting to work in science. , I would prefer to do something flighty and self serving because I am a greedy person, but alas I must make a living.

You're not very good at veiled insults.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

DMC: "I am so proud to be a trained monkey and I am a more sophisticated trained monkey than other trained monkeys!!!!"

Do trained monkeys usually own their own business?

[silverblk mystix]

Do trained monkeys usually own their own business?

Absolutely, you can train a monkey to do anything-even run a business. Other business owners are trained monkeys too. I am sure DMC would try to brag on being trained to run his own business and be a better trained monkey-business owner than other trained monkey business owners.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

You perform cavity searches for a living and call other people trained monkeys?


el oh el

[silverblk mystix]

You perform cavity searches for a living and call other people trained monkeys?


el oh el

We are all trained monkeys regardless of what you imagine I do or not.

No one is exempt. Everyone was trained/educated somewhere in some field of study or another it doesn't really mean and to brag and try to act superior is the funniest joke of all.