How much do "hard" majors help? Forum

[englawyer]

wow group hug time lol

[tesoro]

OK, so maybe mediocre minds are better off studying engineering or accounting.

It is consistent with even your arguments, however, that people should study liberal arts if they either 1) are very bright, that is, capable of scoring above a 160 without too much effort, 2) go to a top ten school from which they can get a good job even with a frivolous degree, 3) have wealthy parents who don't mind spending money for the betterment of their children, or 4) are interested in educational intangibles regardless of their naked economic value.

I think you may agree with me that truly bright and talented people should do whatever they want. That may be engineering for some people. But most of the smartest people I know have zero interest in becoming engineers. In fact, many of the best schools in the country, such as Harvard, don't even have engineering undergraduate programs. And these board seems to be full of people with more than enough mental ability to complete engineering majors who decided instead that they were interested in history, or poetry, or whatever.

Also, many of the smartest people coming from the top law schools will not pursue high paying firm jobs; instead, they will work for the public interest. This may seem stupid to people that only know how to take derivatives. But such are the decisions of people who are potentially much smarter than you number crunchers: yes, even in math.

i 100% agree that liberal arts can be a good major for those that fall in the four categories you mentioned. but the merits and pitfalls of education have to be discussed for the masses. I am mostly thinking about the folks who do not fall into those categories, who are much more likely to land in a job/career that will be a dead-end job w/o much satisfaction. Just as attending a TTT law school, choosing liberal arts from a non-elite undergrad can be a bad choice for most people.

i am not sure where the animosity is coming from (ex "you number crunchers"). public interest seems like a noble pursuit and i don't think its a bad life choice at all.

OK. sorry about the slight animosity. I'm glad you think that liberal arts degrees are "valuable" for a lot of people, and I'm glad you think that public interest is a noble pursuit. I think I was grouping you with tesoro. He can answer for himself if he wishes, but it seems like he would think that pursuing public interest is stupid since people could make a lot more money in firm jobs. I just think it's a very limited view on the value of a life.

I do agree with you, however, that our society has been irresponsible in allowing youths to assume so much educational debt. The educational loan crises will come, I think.

Not a ton to add here. It's been stated and ignored - if you're pursuing history in UG out of passion, knowing you're heading into law regardless of UG major, you're not making a misguided mistake because you're headed toward a profession. Money isn't everything. I professed profound respect for teachers, as well as other professions. PI is perfectly respectable and noble and is a reasonable goal to pursue.

If joe schmoe takes out $160,000 in loans to pursue a history degree, unless joe is the absolute brightest of the bunch the odds say that he will suffer a very menial, mind-numbing career track for the rest of his life unless he can cure such a deficiency in market value with a masters degree (unlikely). Sorry if I was unclear.

[jerjon2]

I really agree with this. I think by and large that college is a good idea but it isn't for everyone. I also think its a bad idea to assume life altering and potentially crippling debt to spend some time finding yourself and I think far too many people are in this boat. I don't have a problem with liberal arts degrees but I think they are only useful in preparing someone for higher education whether it be professional school or graduate study in those same areas. Or if they want to teach the subject at high school or lower level or something like that.

Also, this is really at the heart of why I chose to major in engineering. You may not have the best career prospects in engineering with just a bachelor's but you can make a decent enough wage to live comfortably and support a family. That was of the utmost importance for me because I was really afraid I would just be sick of school and not be willing to continue or go back later.

[prezidentv8]

OK, so maybe mediocre minds are better off studying engineering or accounting.

It is consistent with even your arguments, however, that people should study liberal arts if they either 1) are very bright, that is, capable of scoring above a 160 without too much effort, 2) go to a top ten school from which they can get a good job even with a frivolous degree, 3) have wealthy parents who don't mind spending money for the betterment of their children, or 4) are interested in educational intangibles regardless of their naked economic value.

I think you may agree with me that truly bright and talented people should do whatever they want. That may be engineering for some people. But most of the smartest people I know have zero interest in becoming engineers. In fact, many of the best schools in the country, such as Harvard, don't even have engineering undergraduate programs. And these board seems to be full of people with more than enough mental ability to complete engineering majors who decided instead that they were interested in history, or poetry, or whatever.

Also, many of the smartest people coming from the top law schools will not pursue high paying firm jobs; instead, they will work for the public interest. This may seem stupid to people that only know how to take derivatives. But such are the decisions of people who are potentially much smarter than you number crunchers: yes, even in math.

i 100% agree that liberal arts can be a good major for those that fall in the four categories you mentioned. but the merits and pitfalls of education have to be discussed for the masses. I am mostly thinking about the folks who do not fall into those categories, who are much more likely to land in a job/career that will be a dead-end job w/o much satisfaction. Just as attending a TTT law school, choosing liberal arts from a non-elite undergrad can be a bad choice for most people.

i am not sure where the animosity is coming from (ex "you number crunchers"). public interest seems like a noble pursuit and i don't think its a bad life choice at all.

OK. sorry about the slight animosity. I'm glad you think that liberal arts degrees are "valuable" for a lot of people, and I'm glad you think that public interest is a noble pursuit. I think I was grouping you with tesoro. He can answer for himself if he wishes, but it seems like he would think that pursuing public interest is stupid since people could make a lot more money in firm jobs. I just think it's a very limited view on the value of a life.

I do agree with you, however, that our society has been irresponsible in allowing youths to assume so much educational debt. The educational loan crises will come, I think.

Not a ton to add here. It's been stated and ignored - if you're pursuing history in UG out of passion, knowing you're heading into law regardless of UG major, you're not making a misguided mistake because you're headed toward a profession. Money isn't everything. I professed profound respect for teachers, as well as other professions. PI is perfectly respectable and noble and is a reasonable goal to pursue.

If joe schmoe takes out $160,000 in loans to pursue a history degree, unless joe is the absolute brightest of the bunch the odds say that he will suffer a very menial, mind-numbing career track for the rest of his life unless he can cure such a deficiency in market value with a masters degree (unlikely). Sorry if I was unclear.

Hah...also...lol @ $160k for an undergrad degree.

[tesoro]

Hah...also...lol @ $160k for an undergrad degree.

pretend the degree is free. you're still sentencing yourself for life to a shitty, mind-numbing career track unless you rise far above the rest of your class.

[prezidentv8]

Hah...also...lol @ $160k for an undergrad degree.

pretend the degree is free. you're still sentencing yourself for life to a shitty, mind-numbing career track unless you rise far above the rest of your class.

See that statement I don't agree with. You're just stuck in a regular job, maybe.

[englawyer]

It's profile at Harvard sucks because Harvard's engineering program is a joke. Anyone with the ability to get into Harvard would go to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan or CalTech.

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

[tesoro]

Hah...also...lol @ $160k for an undergrad degree.

pretend the degree is free. you're still sentencing yourself for life to a shitty, mind-numbing career track unless you rise far above the rest of your class.

See that statement I don't agree with. You're just stuck in a regular job, maybe.

I'm glad people are satisfied with pushing papers at regular jobs. Unless I've misunderstood what a "regular job" is, it's probably a low-level cog in a big corporation. Boring, shitty, and terribly repetitive for a lifetime. A living hell.


edit: are you in/fresh out of UG/going straight back to law school? Maybe I can forgive you because you're ignorant about what a real job is and what earns corporations money (i.e., what they will hire you to do).

[jerjon2]

It's profile at Harvard sucks because Harvard's engineering program is a joke. Anyone with the ability to get into Harvard would go to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan or CalTech.

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

I can't argue with the opportunity to network with rich people but finance and consulting firms recruit engineering grads heavily at my school (top 5 engineering). A lot of them aren't even interested in the business majors. Two of my best friends are starting with Deloitte after graduation.

[stratocophic]

It's profile at Harvard sucks because Harvard's engineering program is a joke. Anyone with the ability to get into Harvard would go to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan or CalTech unless, deep down, they don't really want to be engineers and just don't know it yet... like me.

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

Fixed.

[stratocophic]

It's profile at Harvard sucks because Harvard's engineering program is a joke. Anyone with the ability to get into Harvard would go to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan or CalTech.

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

I can't argue with the opportunity to network with rich people but finance and consulting firms recruit engineering grads heavily at my school (top 5 engineering). A lot of them aren't even interested in the business majors. Two of my best friends are starting with Deloitte after graduation.

I go to Harvard's unloved second cousin in the South, and fully 50% of our engineering grads don't go into engineering at all. Engineers are simply desirable for any sort of analytical job. Having seen something similar to the Harvard Effect (albeit to a much lesser degree), I can vouch for the utility.

Edit: Aren't a lot of the business majors at that school engineers that couldn't hack it? Honestly curious, I know a few people who went there and feel like I know a little bit about the school.

[englawyer]

It's profile at Harvard sucks because Harvard's engineering program is a joke. Anyone with the ability to get into Harvard would go to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan or CalTech.

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

I can't argue with the opportunity to network with rich people but finance and consulting firms recruit engineering grads heavily at my school (top 5 engineering). A lot of them aren't even interested in the business majors. Two of my best friends are starting with Deloitte after graduation.

i think in general engineering majors have more recruiting opps than business majors. it also heavily depends on the department within finance/consulting. for example, Goldman Sachs recruited at my school for the IT department. Accenture also came by for IT consulting.

to clarify, i would go to H and major in engineering.

[fable2]

I really agree with this. I think by and large that college is a good idea but it isn't for everyone. I also think its a bad idea to assume life altering and potentially crippling debt to spend some time finding yourself and I think far too many people are in this boat. I don't have a problem with liberal arts degrees but I think they are only useful in preparing someone for higher education whether it be professional school or graduate study in those same areas. Or if they want to teach the subject at high school or lower level or something like that.

Also, this is really at the heart of why I chose to major in engineering. You may not have the best career prospects in engineering with just a bachelor's but you can make a decent enough wage to live comfortably and support a family. That was of the utmost importance for me because I was really afraid I would just be sick of school and not be willing to continue or go back later.

This is key. I for one had always intended to get at the very least a masters degree immediately after undergrad, so whether or not I was entering a vocational program wasn't important to me. I cared about practicality but more so about what I found intellectually engaging. Those who have no intention of pursuing graduate degrees, are saddled by immense debt, or are keen on joining the job market obviously have different priorities in mind when choosing their majors.

also, natural sciences such as physics, chemistry and biology aren't necessarily 'practical' either. Both my parents have PhD's in the biological sciences, and they discouraged me from going in to the field (not that I was interested in it to begin with) because of the scarcity of jobs. That is, if you don't have at least a graduate degree, you'll be stuck working as a lowly lab assistant and if you get a PhD, you'll be overqualified to do laboratory grunt work and will face prestigious, but heavily competitive research positions within the private and public sectors. Both have told me horror stories about the plethora of PhD's who send in resumes for positions within their respective firms/gov't institution that are far beneath what their degrees qualify them to do.

[prezidentv8]

Hah...also...lol @ $160k for an undergrad degree.

pretend the degree is free. you're still sentencing yourself for life to a shitty, mind-numbing career track unless you rise far above the rest of your class.

See that statement I don't agree with. You're just stuck in a regular job, maybe.

I'm glad people are satisfied with pushing papers at regular jobs. Unless I've misunderstood what a "regular job" is, it's probably a low-level cog in a big corporation. Boring, shitty, and terribly repetitive for a lifetime. A living hell.


edit: are you in/fresh out of UG/going straight back to law school? Maybe I can forgive you because you're ignorant about what a real job is and what earns corporations money (i.e., what they will hire you to do).

Well...those are the types of jobs that the vast majority of people do. Like I said before, it's a subjective preference thing. For most people the engineering (or finance or whatever) degree simply isn't worth it, so they go with the fun degree and regular job.

Yes I'm straight UG-->Law (1L) but I'm not sure why that matters. Most jobs aren't too big of a mystery. I understand that corporate stuff can be repetitive, boring, and all of that, but it's still a subjective choice.

And it's not a sentence, either. Out of "shitty" schools, I can tell you that the fluff liberal arts degrees really aren't doing so poorly, even in this economy. I can think of at least one guy off the top of my head who went polisci --> finance at Lockheed from a relatively un-prestigious state school, with bad grades to boot. He busted his ass at a low paying internship for a while and networked like all hell. Other people went to the wine industry, one guy is doing some corporate job in China, a couple are military officers. A few went to law/grad schools. Others are teaching. I know a bunch of cops too. None of these are bad jobs, they just required a bit of creativity. Other people went retail, some are in the service sector, and others are unemployed, too.

I guess if I had to sum it up, I'd say it's the Indian and not the arrow.

[jerjon2]

It's profile at Harvard sucks because Harvard's engineering program is a joke. Anyone with the ability to get into Harvard would go to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan or CalTech.

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

I can't argue with the opportunity to network with rich people but finance and consulting firms recruit engineering grads heavily at my school (top 5 engineering). A lot of them aren't even interested in the business majors. Two of my best friends are starting with Deloitte after graduation.

I go to Harvard's unloved second cousin in the South, and fully 50% of our engineering grads don't go into engineering at all. Engineers are simply desirable for any sort of analytical job. Having seen something similar to the Harvard Effect (albeit to a much lesser degree), I can vouch for the utility.

Edit: Aren't a lot of the business majors at that school engineers that couldn't hack it? Honestly curious, I know a few people who went there and feel like I know a little bit about the school.

Yea, a lot of them are. A lot of them also have really really low GPAs because they fucked up at engineering so badly that they can't even turn the GPA around. I think our business school is supposed to be decent though, I think thats may just be the MBA program though. BTW, if you know people at the school and think you know a bit about you may appreciate (http://www.onlyattech.net) its basically FML but GT specific. You should check it out if you've ever heard stories about the school from other people.

Edit: Anyone who went to school for engineering or to a school known for engineering should check out that site. You would probably like it.

[jerjon2]

It's profile at Harvard sucks because Harvard's engineering program is a joke. Anyone with the ability to get into Harvard would go to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan or CalTech.

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

I can't argue with the opportunity to network with rich people but finance and consulting firms recruit engineering grads heavily at my school (top 5 engineering). A lot of them aren't even interested in the business majors. Two of my best friends are starting with Deloitte after graduation.

i think in general engineering majors have more recruiting opps than business majors. it also heavily depends on the department within finance/consulting. for example, Goldman Sachs recruited at my school for the IT department. Accenture also came by for IT consulting.

to clarify, i would go to H and major in engineering.

The recruiting opportunities also influenced my decision as to what type of engineering. Here the college of electrical and computer engineering is the only college with it's own career fair and a lot of the participating companies don't have shit to do with ECE.

[stratocophic]

i actually disagree. the power of the H-bomb is amazing, and even if it has a bad engineering dept i would totally prestige-whore and go there. the non-engineering job opportunities would be better (ex finance, consulting) and you would get the chance to network with a huge variety of interesting/rich people. the grade-inflation would also be nice.

I can't argue with the opportunity to network with rich people but finance and consulting firms recruit engineering grads heavily at my school (top 5 engineering). A lot of them aren't even interested in the business majors. Two of my best friends are starting with Deloitte after graduation.

I go to Harvard's unloved second cousin in the South, and fully 50% of our engineering grads don't go into engineering at all. Engineers are simply desirable for any sort of analytical job. Having seen something similar to the Harvard Effect (albeit to a much lesser degree), I can vouch for the utility.

Edit: Aren't a lot of the business majors at that school engineers that couldn't hack it? Honestly curious, I know a few people who went there and feel like I know a little bit about the school.

Yea, a lot of them are. A lot of them also have really really low GPAs because they fucked up at engineering so badly that they can't even turn the GPA around. I think our business school is supposed to be decent though, I think thats may just be the MBA program though. BTW, if you know people at the school and think you know a bit about you may appreciate (http://www.onlyattech.net) its basically FML but GT specific. You should check it out if you've ever heard stories about the school from other people.

Edit: Anyone who went to school for engineering or to a school known for engineering should check out that site. You would probably like it.

What engineer hasn't heard about life at GT? The 75-25% ratio of M/F is only the precursor, from what I've heard. Engineer = misery, thereore <3s company, thanks for the link

Edit: Yeah, I thought so, regarding the B school. My school's engineering science major is basically the equivalent of your business school. It's where former real engineers go to lick their wounds and develop a strong upward trend.

[prezidentv8]

The 75-25% ratio of M/F

Another reason not to major in engineering.

[stratocophic]

The 75-25% ratio of M/F

Another reason not to major in engineering.

Why do you think I'm not at GT? As a freshman, I knew I could live without seeing girls at my classes. I've heard stories from guys at GT about literally going days without seeing a single girl anywhere, thus reaffirming my school choice to some degree.

[prezidentv8]

The 75-25% ratio of M/F

Another reason not to major in engineering.

Why do you think I'm not at GT? As a freshman, I knew I could live without seeing girls at my classes. I've heard stories from guys at GT about literally going days without seeing a single girl anywhere, thus reaffirming my school choice to some degree.

Sonoma was almost the exact opposite ratio, and awesome.

[jerjon2]

The 75-25% ratio of M/F

Another reason not to major in engineering.

Why do you think I'm not at GT? As a freshman, I knew I could live without seeing girls at my classes. I've heard stories from guys at GT about literally going days without seeing a single girl anywhere, thus reaffirming my school choice to some degree.

I could see that. I wouldn't have gone to GT if I weren't from Ga. I can't argue with a top five school in high paying profession for basically free (Hope Scholarship). To be fair, the ratio is closer to 70/30 and improving ever so slightly. I think the freshman class ratio is like 68/32. Yes you can go days without seeing a girl, by and large they re all in soft majors here. But I gotta give shout out to the females, the ones that do major in engineering, usually stick with it and do really well. In my last semester, I'm taking 4 classes and 2 of them have no females. Of the two that have females one is kind of a cheat because its senior design for my major and there is only one lecture section (with something like 200 people)

Edit: To go days without seeing any girls, you'd have to really suck at being social or seeing sunlight. I say it is entirely possible because that describes so many people here.

[stratocophic]

The 75-25% ratio of M/F

Another reason not to major in engineering.

Why do you think I'm not at GT? As a freshman, I knew I could live without seeing girls at my classes. I've heard stories from guys at GT about literally going days without seeing a single girl anywhere, thus reaffirming my school choice to some degree.

I could see that. I wouldn't have gone to GT if I weren't from Ga. I can't argue with a top five school in high paying profession for basically free (Hope Scholarship). To be fair, the ratio is closer to 70/30 and improving ever so slightly. I think the freshman class ratio is like 68/32. Yes you can go days without seeing a girl, by and large they re all in soft majors here. But I gotta give shout out to the females, the ones that do major in engineering, usually stick with it and do really well. In my last semester, I'm taking 4 classes and 2 of them have no females. Of the two that have females one is kind of a cheat because its senior design for my major and there is only one lecture section (with something like 200 people)

Edit: To go days without seeing any girls, you'd have to really suck at being social or seeing sunlight. I say it is entirely possible because that describes so many people here.

Yeah, I got a good scholarship to GT (like 18K or something) but I was out of state, so it wasn't worth it. I'd have come away with more in loans than I did from Vandy so it just didn't make sense financially either. For what it's worth, the female engineers here are generally more dedicated/simply smarter than the majority of the guys.

[BarCliff]

I go to GT (engineering) and am going to UVa in the Fall.

Engineering is a beast.

[prezidentv8]

the female engineers here are generally more dedicated/simply smarter than the majority of the guys.

Nothin sexier than a good lookin smart chick.

[jerjon2]

I go to GT (engineering) and am going to UVa in the Fall.

Engineering is a beast.

That's what's up. What major are you and are you interested in IP law? Also, at least you will get a different experience this time. From what I hear, UChicago is pretty nerdy too...