<p>I’ve noticed that some people often turn to math and physics - where there are clear and right answers to problems - rather than the social sciences and humanities - where they’re taught that there are no clear right answers to anything. I know a girl who decided to major in math rather than any of the sciences due to this, for example. </p>
<p>do you find the lack of clear and right answers in the social sciences and humanities disturbing? or do you find this lack of clear and right answers liberating? do you think of it as a reason to prefer one field over another?</p>
<p>personally, i’m comfortable with no clear and right answers. it shows that most people with differing ideas have something to contribute - and that if you get something that does not agree with the instructor, it does not totally count against you. When I’m studying something, I prefer fields where there are no clear and right answers. it’s usually the field of applications where “no clear and right answers” become disturbing (but that affects math and science as well - as the choice of research field and that of hiring researchers has no clear and right answers either).</p>
<p>Interesting and well thought out. I think I have an affinity for both sides. I don’t prefer one or the other. If you think about it, nothing really has a clear and right answer, even math and physics. I think things that dont have a clear answer would make people feel better because then you can make your decision to what you feel is right.</p>
<p>In fields with no clear and easy answers, I start from (hand-wavy) axioms and work from there.</p>
<p>Axiom: All men should be free until they give up their freedom by choice.</p>
<p>Corollary: Education should not be compulsory.</p>
<p>The proof of this is left as an exercise to the reader.
(Though neither statement was stated as precisely as it should have been. This is where intuition replaces precise definition, because defining things precisely is rather hard.)</p>
<p>But for the most part, I try to stay away from such subjects, because nobody ever seems to accept the same axioms as me…math is far more universally accepted :)</p>
<p>I’m taking my degree in social sciences for just that reason - I love grey areas. For me, this leaves much more room for exploration, discovery, and interpretation. These things are incredibly valuable to me in my attempt to get a true liberal arts education. My favorite class at the moment is International Relations Theory. </p>
<p>However, I disagree with you when you say that math and sciences tend towards clear and right answers. These subjects are taught this way at the lower levels, but I think that eventually there is actually quite a bit of room for debate among researchers. The nature of these fields is assumed to be inherently positivist and objective, and I have to disagree with that assumption. This is one reason I’m not in science - I dislike how it is taught and how the field’s assumption of positivism is normalized, with little room for any grey areas until you are quite far along in your education.</p>
<p>^ It has ended. He’s returned back to normal. This is a standard IK thread. The ‘IMAGINE ZAC EFRON AND GEORGE BUSH MARRIED’ threads have stopped.</p>
<p>Now that you bring it up, math and physics do make me feel safe because there is usually one answer. But not all maths. Geometry for instance. It makes my skin crawl.</p>
<p>That’s definitely true (even in math - you have those debates over Hilbert’s axioms). But it seems that some people like “clear and unambiguous” answers even in hard science/math. Also - “clear and unambiguous answers” are obviously what build up the foundations of both math and science (in science, it’s known as hypothesis testing => support of hypothesis => empirical rigor). They’re not totally clear/unambiguous, and there are a lot of grey areas, but there seem to be considerably fewer grey areas than in the social sciences (or in any field that demands that one take an action and choose among possibilities). It seems that people are more comfortable with clear and unambiguous answers when they want to avoid debate and politics (but those USUALLY aren’t issues when it comes to coursework - unless you want to challenge your teacher at every break :p)</p>
<p>I don’t really like how science is taught either - it relies too much on problem sets and not enough on, say, the research literature (or on self-investigation in general).</p>
<p>But George Bush doesn’t believe in sam sex marrriage, thus making your situation a paradox. Unless, of course, we’re speaking in purely alternate universes.</p>
<p>Even in basic statistics, there’s some debate. Like with the calculation of the sample variance - the IB and AP programs contradict each other there.</p>
<p>And no, Zac Efron and Brad are not going to divert the attention of Angelina Jolie so that they can have an affair. That would be creepy. And great tabloid fodder.</p>