<blockquote>
<p>dodgersmom
Sure! Some students I’ve talked to said its physics dept could probably rank the first in all the LACs, and while this can be biased, I believe it reflects how strong it is. It’s also quite interesting that when I told some Swatties I was considering Carleton, they were immediately like “you must be going to study sciences or maths”. It’s certainly not its physics department that I’m worrying (I got the impression that at both college the phys dept is spectacular, so unless I missed some things this isn’t going to be a factor I think). Although I know eventually I won’t be able to take as much as I’d want, I plan to take many courses outside physics, so I’m also considering some other depts. I heard that Carleton’s history, geology and psychology depts were phenomenal or fantastic, and the last dept I’m checking is philosophy. I had thought about linguistics but it wouldn’t be a big factor anyway, not to mention when under Carleton’s reputation of teaching.</p>
<p>jack63
Wow…
So does the “indirectness” - which I love - mean that people don’t tend to academically debate or confronting their ideas, etc.?
Also, I was reading students’ reviews, and found this: “Complacency is also a strong component of relative comfort levels on campus - I would not encourage students who think themselves to be politicized to attend this school.”
While I happen to be interested and concerned about (some) current affairs and social issues. I understand that “politics” isn’t synonymous with current affairs, but as so incredibly many people talk about political views but (relatively) few about social affairs attitude stuff, I’m doubting what “politicized” here really means - when people talk about being liberal/conservative/moderate/political, etc. are people literally referring to their views of politics/governments/political affairs itself/themselves? And what do you think of the “complacency” - if ever accurate?</p>
</blockquote>