Quote :

"Anybody have ENG 223 Final before??? I know... 200-level lit but still ima engineer not a freakin novelist!!!!"

but you CAN read

so you should know something by now

4/27/2008 5:28:21 PM

the whole 'i study engineering, fuck off english' doesn't fly w/ fuchsia.

4/27/2008 5:34:13 PM

peeps just wanna be lazy, B

that's not how I roll

4/27/2008 5:55:11 PM

I am lazy but i know my material so i'm gud2go - so its not really being lazy but secure in your preparedness

4/27/2008 6:36:18 PM

i wonder what the hardest major is, i know EE is not too fun right now but i imagine all majors are pretty hard

4/27/2008 10:46:42 PM

Monday = Econ Stat (BUS 350) Exam, Read 307 pages for history, Receive take-home Microeconomics Exam
Tuesday = History Exam(HI 264), Work on Microeconomics Exam
Wednesday = Turn in Microeconomics Exam (EC 301), Start furiously reading 400 pg book "Elusive Quest for Growth"
Thursday = Finish reading, Work on Macroeconomics Take-home (which will take approximately 15+ hours)
Friday = Turn in Macroeconomics exam (EC 302), drink, sleep

4/28/2008 12:01:37 AM

Does anyone else hate classes that still count the final more than any other exam?

Like it counts 30% of your grade......I hate that, it really shouldn't be that much more important.

4/28/2008 12:14:35 AM

oh god. I have a 10-15 page paper that i haven't started, a take home quiz to do, and im only half way done studying for my final and i know i need to pull an alnighter but im already going on 4 hours sleep and im exausted and think mabey i just need to sleep for 3 hours and wake back up

4/28/2008 12:15:10 AM

^^ i'm pretty sure all of my classes count the final that much.

at least 25%.

4/28/2008 12:16:07 AM

^^ Sale on Starbucks Doubleshot drink at Harris Teeter right now. Just picked up my all-nighter snack foods and bought a 4-pack of it.

4/28/2008 12:21:03 AM

^^^good luck, take a quick nap and drink some coffee

4/28/2008 12:47:15 AM

ha, i drank a double shot and took an adderall bout 2 hours ago and im still fallin over



im bout to go to sleep and wake back up at 3. GOOD LUCK PEOPLE!

4/28/2008 12:53:19 AM

oh gosh, dont take adderall, just coffee, aderall will screw up your head and you wont remember half the stufff you studied

4/28/2008 1:03:14 AM

no exams...just 5 projects...last week was hell...got a project due tomorrow, 2 due tues, class thurs 9-10

4/28/2008 1:04:18 AM

Adderall definitely can backfire, been there and won't again.

4/28/2008 1:25:38 AM

I'm an engineer and I find english classes (and really all my humanities, albeit 200 levels) to be complete jokes. It's like you can make up whatever you want, as long as your steps are logical, and you'll pass. Versus having to find a definite right solution with engineering.

4/28/2008 1:59:02 AM

but even the engineering depends heavily on assumptions

your "definite answer" is a function of those, just as an argument in a paper is based on a text and logic

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:04 AM. Reason : that said, 200-levels are nothing like 400-levels]

4/28/2008 2:00:41 AM

^^exactly, you can bs your way right through it, but they actually have things they could teach you but you'll hardly ever use it
and even if you do, no-one will notice

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:01 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:01:13 AM

^^ but those assumptions are based on quantitative measurements.

Whether or not a i feel some essay/short story was deep or meaningful is sometimes just by on random personal opinion.

4/28/2008 2:05:39 AM

Quote :

"but those assumptions are based on quantitative measurements"

not really: I mean, there are a wide variety of practice problems that aren't "real" situations
I mean, depending on the process you might use steam tables or other real data, but that doesn't make it an objective art: it's just as tied to the system you're given as an argument is to a text

if you wrote a paper on your opinion about how touchy feely you thought something was, then I have no idea what kind of bizarro class you had: usually lit classes involve looking at a text much more critically

it doesn't really matter if you liked the work or not, just whether you have something interesting to say about what it's doing at a local or global level

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:12 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:10:56 AM

^there's still a big difference. Engineering is usually fact and there can't be two different answers. This is obvious because we wouldn't want civil engineers debating over which stress measurments were the correct ones. You're talking more about theoretical physics.

yeah there's no argument here. When you do physics or math its usually based upon quantitative measurements. Two people can't do the same experiment and get different answers if the same input date and theory are used. Whereas when you're writing a paper, as long as you make a good argument you can't always be seen as incorrect.

Engineering is more fact and measurable things. I guess theoretical physics would be a better comparison to the humanities because it's not always based upon something you can see and measure.

Quote :

"I'm an engineer and I find english classes (and really all my humanities, albeit 200 levels) to be complete jokes. "

unfortunately i have found this to be the case also. I love when Tran makes fun of lower-level humanities. I rarely have to think in anything 200 level and i have yet to get a B. Whereas in some 200 level engineering classes you still get fucked in the ass.

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:14 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:11:10 AM

Quote :

"Whereas when you're writing a paper, as long as you make a good argument you can't always be seen as incorrect."

Sure you can, if you're way off base.

I could write this paper about how Emily Dickinson was writing about the War in Iraq, and I would therefore be making an argument that would be fundamentally ridiculous.

Quote :

"Engineering is usually fact and there can't be two different answers. This is obvious because we wouldn't want civil engineers debating over which stress measurments were the correct ones. You're talking more about theoretical physics."

I'm not talking about physics at all. I'm talking about engineering. And I wasn't talking about standards of measurements. I was talking about how engineering relies on basic fundamental assumptions for any given system. You can't just go out and "do engineering" without assuming shit like gravity, etc if you're doing a calculation for something on earth. And you're crazy if you think that engineering is an "exact" science: the more you do it, the more you see that things are heavily assumed.

Similarly, any GOOD argument relies on basic logic and interpretation of any text.

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:18 AM. Reason : ..]

4/28/2008 2:13:28 AM

Quote :

"if you wrote a paper on your opinion about how touchy feely you thought something was, then I have no idea what kind of bizarro class you had: usually lit classes involve looking at a text much more critically "

I found my HS classes (particularly at NCSSM) to be more critical than the 3 english classes i've taken.

In the ENG classes here, I merely had to regurgitate the teacher's opinions to get an A. To deviate from this would get me a B or a C.

4/28/2008 2:15:04 AM

^^Yeah but you could still make it, and as long as you had a good enough argument and used great rhetoric you would be taken seriously. Whereas if you're calculating the stress a bridge can withstand and get completely different answer than everyone else you obviously made a mistake.

^haha exactly. I have no trouble bullshitting my way through 200 level classes here. As long as you make the teacher happy you get an A. Whereas my AP classes back in highschool you had to work your ass off just to get a C or B.

^^you're thinking too much. Engineering is one of the most exact sciences out there. It has to be if everyone is going to built shit that works. Yes there are research engineers who dabble in stuff that isn't as sound but it's still NO WHERE near that of humanities. I think it's silly we're comparing the two.

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:20 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:17:17 AM

Quote :

"I found my HS classes (particularly at NCSSM) to be more critical than the 3 english classes i've taken."

With whom?

I had Nanney, Miller and Woodmansee, but I've had better 400-level classes in English here than there. And they haven't been easy, but they've been much more interesting than any 200-level (maybe this is due to all the apathetic people who are forced into taking these) I've taken.

V More importantly, I don't think any of them realizes I have an engineering degree and am talking about ONE specific point and not comparing the two subjects holistically.

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:22 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:19:54 AM

i should've known this would've turned into a 'make fun of chass while measuring your dick at the same time' thread.

4/28/2008 2:19:59 AM

^^ haha, I couldn't tell you the names of my professors. I think that was one problem with the classes, is that unlike in high school, they didn't seem to encourage discussion or anything like that. It was just sitting their listening to them tell you about something.

But, it was eng 113, studies in fiction (don't know the number), and 331 (one about writing resumes and stuff).

^^ i knew you had an engineering degree, and I also knew it was with chemistry. Of all the sciences, Chemistry is my least favorite because of what I perceive as its ambiguity, which may be why you see engineering and humanities to be so similar.


[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:24 AM. Reason : ]

4/28/2008 2:22:53 AM

^i think in highschool its because you had to sign up for APs and the teachers usually knew you wanted to be there. Whereas here most of the basic english and humanities classes are full of people who don't want to be there.

Half my professors make fun of chass because that's where most of the engineering drop outs go. Tran loves doing it. I have nothign wrong with chass i just think it's silly to think the humanities and engineering are on the same level in regard to making assumptions and finding conclusions. There's A LOT more headway in the humanities. As long as you make a good argument and use intelligent rhetoric then you will be taken seriously. You can't go around saying the earths gravity is different than the convention and expect people to use your results to design stuff.

Quote :

"talking about ONE specific point "

what one point?

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:27 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:23:28 AM

Quote :

"Of all the sciences, Chemistry is my least favorite because of what I perceive as its ambiguity, which may be why you see engineering and humanities to be so similar."

holy fucking shit.

that'll about do it for you and this argument, i think.

4/28/2008 2:27:21 AM

Quote :

"haha, I couldn't tell you the names of my professors. I think that was one problem with the classes, is that unlike in high school, they didn't seem to encourage discussion or anything like that. It was just sitting their listening to them tell you about something."

No, I mean at NCSSM.

Quote :

"i knew you had an engineering degree, and I also knew it was with chemistry. Of all the sciences, Chemistry is my least favorite because of what I perceive as its ambiguity, which may be why you see engineering and humanities to be so similar."

It's entirely unambiguous compared to biology. Chemical Engineering isn't soft, and AGAIN, I WASN'T COMPARING THE TWO HOLISTICALLY.

Quote :

"Half my professors make fun of chass because that's where most of the engineering drop outs go. Tran loves doing it. I have nothign wrong with chass i just think it's silly to think the humanities and engineering are on the same level in regard to making assumptions and finding conclusions. There's A LOT more headway in the humanities. As long as you make a good argument and use intelligent rhetoric then you will be taken seriously. You can't go around saying the earths gravity is different than the convention and expect people to use your results to design stuff."

FOR THE LAST TIME, I WASN'T FUCKING COMPARING THE TWO HOLISTICALLY

and nor did I say that they were equal in assumptions in conclusions, I'm only discussing the fact that subjectivity plays a role in both

engineering is not an objective science: they build in all kinds of protective calculations for buildings so they really will stand up in case their calculated number is a tad off, etc

the system determines what you do with your results

if you're designing something for made for space travel, then yes, you're going to change your assumption about gravity in the system you're doing the calculations in

and no, you cannot write a paper about anything with good rhetoric in a 400-level and expect they'd care just because you said so: it really does require more than that

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:32 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:29:50 AM

Quote :

" the fact that subjectivity plays a role in both"

Well yeah. You can make the argument that subjectivity plays a role in ANY disipline. That weakens your argument and weakens the definition of subjective. Obviously subjectivity plays a role in both, i think we're trying to say its a lot less in some disiplines than others.

Quote :

"engineering is not an objective science:"

to strengthen your argument give me a more objective science than engineering. I was simply saying that engineering is more objective than most sciences because it's the disipline that has the most common applications.

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:35 AM. Reason : .]

4/28/2008 2:32:53 AM

that's WHY what I said didn't need to be argued about: I really didn't say anything groundbreaking

and nor did I want to argue about what's more important

because everyone is bullheaded about their own departments

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:35 AM. Reason : so I'm done with arguing anything here: it's not about which is more or less subjective either]

4/28/2008 2:34:18 AM

Quote :

"No, I mean at NCSSM. "

Oh, I remember I had Moose for English, and she was easily the best English teacher i've ever had. I can't think of the other names now (except Kolena for physics which makes me shudder a bit, although i'm good at physics).

4/28/2008 2:37:11 AM

yeah but you can obviously say one is more subjective than another. You just don't want to admit it. If you had a 100 engineers solving a problem involving a stress factor on aa airplane, and you had a 100 philosophers or english majors discussing the meaning of a word or feeling, you'll obviously get a wider variety of answers in the later than the former.

4/28/2008 2:38:20 AM

^^ I liked her, she always did the Tennessee Williams plays and such: I think I did Phys Tops, but I didn't have Kolena- I don't remember who I had. I mostly just did stuff with Dr. Allen and Dr. Roser on the chem floor.

^ I'm not saying there's isn't a difference in those levels, but that's NOT IMPORTANT to me

quit trying to make me say something against either major:that's all you fuckers seem to want to make me do

I'm not going to claim one is more useful and I'm not going to claim that one is better, so quit it

Science invented the atomic bomb, too: but hell, science is always better, right?! There's still something to be said for creative thinking outside of the restrictions of mathematics, too, and I don't find it useless at all. I'm sorry you do.

I'm not going to debate the merits of either, I only made a passing comment that blew up into something I didn't intend and that you're now trying to continue

[Edited on April 28, 2008 at 2:45 AM. Reason : but I'm done]

4/28/2008 2:43:54 AM

by the way...still furshia is in the show battle star galatica...i saw it the other day and she was definitely in it

4/28/2008 2:45:24 AM

^^lol my apologies.

Quote :

"I don't find it useless at all. I'm sorry you do."

Don't make unwarranted assumptions. I went to an arts school where i majored in music and theatre before engineering. So yes of course there is something to be said for creative thinking. One of the reasons i went into engineering was to add some of that creative thinking i had previously learned to a sometimes uncreative field. I was just giving you a hard time because it seemed like you were trying to say engineering was more or less just as subjective as the humanities. You're simply weakening the definition by broadening the meaning of subjective. There obviously has to be extremes to understand what is and what isn't. Some fields are obviously more subjective than others. Back to the original point that taking an engineering test or class is usually a little more straightforward than taking a humanities class in regard to conclusions and results.

4/28/2008 4:45:25 AM

awake

4/28/2008 5:03:37 AM

Quote :

"i should've known this would've turned into a 'make fun of chass while measuring your dick at the same time'"

I got nothing against CHASS

But I do think it's unfair that most of the general classes everyone has to take will count towards a chass major's actual major classes

4/28/2008 5:44:57 AM

hum, 10 hours and 15 pages

guess i should get on that

4/28/2008 7:39:40 AM

^^ no, GERs don't double count as major requirements in CHASS

there's separate coursework I have to do on top of all those just like everyone else

4/28/2008 8:11:39 AM

Quote :

"by the way...still furshia is in the show battle star galatica...i saw it the other day and she was definitely in it"

hahahaha

4/28/2008 9:38:53 AM

AND HELLO AGAIN!

5/2/2008 1:04:45 AM

FUCK THIS SHIT.
PSY 242 final. After learning about 20 different statistical tests, the final appears to be almost entirely theoretical: When do you use what and why? This is the part I am BAD at. Ugh.

5/2/2008 1:23:47 AM

I don't think I can make it...only slept one night this week

5/2/2008 1:32:09 AM