/sci/ - Science & Math

Here is data for philosophy, probably from some humanities department as it's almost like propaganda.
Once again, philosophy scores the highest in verbal and writing ability, AND is the highest scoring major outside of STEM for quantatative which I think is interesting.

The Law school data is actually false as there is another chart with the same data But includes Physics scoring 160, above everything else, which is very interesting. How could Physics score higher than Philosophy for a Law school exam? As far as I can surmise, the only reason to major In Philosophy specifically is to go to law school.
Also, Math and Physics have the highest scores for exam for business school, no business degrees, once again Philosophy right next to them.

Why does Physics, Math, and Philosophy always score above everything else even when it isn't related to the major? I find this to be very interesting.

Philosophy, 8 points away from equaling Mathematics in a quantatative exam out of 180, and even fewer points away for other majors like Physics and Engineering, majors you would think are far ahead quantatatively.

>>10587223
>>10587278
>Every single thread of this nature is propaganda to make someone feel superior about their choice of study.
I shiggy diggy.

What is the point of trying to quantify fields in this manner? If you spend your whole life studying/practicing something that you hate, that makes you the greatest brainlet of all time short of being a non-compulsory vegetable.

Something else that is very interesting is how, just as philosophy is the highest scoring in quantatative that is not a STEM major, Physics is the highest scoring verbal/analytic writing that is STEM. Physics and Philosophy are always complimenting each other in this way.

>>10587223
GRE is not predictive of success in graduate school past the first year

If philosophers/philosophy majors are so desperate to hang out with and talk to scientists and science majors why don't you study a scientific field.

>>10587312
We can look at the opposite as well. Philosophy is a terrible choice for employment opportunities, Physics also seems so.

>>10587334
This doesn't address the question. Why are these poor attempts at ranking/quantifying fields of study meaningful to anyone? What is the end goal? You're basically only showing that field choice can be used as a de facto filter for GRE scoring, but I fail to see how that would correlate to the subjective ranking of quality of life by people of all fields.

Who cares, the GRE is a joke.

>>10587384
Apparently not for engineers, CS, and anything else below physics, math, philosophy, and classics. Are you upset?

>>10587300
How anyone manages to get below 160 on the quant portion of this test really baffles me. Any 9th grader without a fucking learning disability should be perfectly capable of getting a perfect score on that.
I can understand dropping a few points on the verbal because some of the questions contain autistic vocabulary that not everyone will know and there are some others that ask you to interpret tortuously complicated, deliberately confusing paragraphs which you might guess wrong on.
But the quantitative, there's literally no excuse to ever miss more than 1-2 questions from arithmetic goofs.

>>10587428
Why do you think this?

>>10587377
It definitely addresses quality of life. No job, no money after graduating? I highly doubt you are having a nice time. Engineers and PhDs definitely work over 40 hours per week, but at least they're doing something.

Also, if you think smart people don't gravitate to these fields and that they score higher because of the program itself, then you have to admit that certain majors are better than others at educating you and that the others are inefficient and effectively vocational and dont require college at all.

>>10587223
Economists definitely have higher verbal than physicists. Physicists are barely literate and can't even spell.

>>10587471
>It definitely addresses quality of life. No job, no money after graduating? I highly doubt you are having a nice time.
Well, let's examine that bit. It seems intuitive that being unemployed will make you less happy. Having some data comparing unemployment rates of different fields of study could yield some merit. Your argument hinges on the idea that someone cannot be employed at all if they fail to be hired in their field of study though, and this is obviously false.

Moving past being unemployed, let's assume everyone finds a job and their field and compare their happiness. Does an increase in income strongly correlate to an increase in happiness? At worst, no (https://geraldguild.com/blog/2012/05/23/happiness-as-measured-by-gdp-really/)), and at best, non-linearly with diminishing returns (https://www.michaelpage.co.uk/minisite/salary-vs-happiness/).). Lower income people have a greater range of potential happiness, but I speculate that this graph would appear more flat if we removed all occupations that did not require a college education. If possible, try correlating GRE scores to happiness, this would be a better metric to go off of.

This is getting off point though, which is that I don't get your point at all. Better GRE scores are not inherently more valuable. What value do you associate with better GRE scores, and why does that matter to anyone else?

>>10587584
If you fail to be hired in something related to what you studied the what was the point? Very few people have the luxury of going to university to study something with no regard for future prospects. Many people have a lot of of debt and effectively need to have a job when they graduate or else risk their life ruined financially when the interest accrues.
What is the value of having a higher average score for a group on any exam? It either says something about the people gravitating to that major or to the program itself. I don't think that physics and philosophy majors are the happiest. Philosophy majors. have a high unemployment rate and physics majors typically go to a PhD and work ~16 hours for 4-7 years on ~$24,000 annually.
What do you go to college for? Most people go for future career, some sense that their quality of life will improve because they will make more money, work in a comfortable office, and possibly do something or the world or at least fantasize such a future.

Do you want to become a clergyman because of the Michaelpage.uk link? They're just outliers. The chart clearly shows that you're more likely to be happier if you make more money.

>another IQ thread

>>10587223
>It also shows that Engineering is mildly lower than Physics quantatatively(why?) but verbally, Engineering scores significantly lower,
It's more applied, as in, hands on. There's certainly more to engineering than verbosity and mathematics, while those skills are quite valuable to academics.

>>10587584
This is just dumb. They're happy because they're morons. Farmers, clergy, secretaries, dental assistants, are you kidding me? Obviously they're happy. They don't even try. They're fucking losers that don't think about anything other than what they're going to do on the weekend. They took the easy way out; the road frequently traveled. Fuck them and fuck you for thinking all happiness is equal. Their surface level ignorant happiness is not true happiness of a CEO or a scientist, mathematician, engineer, or any other highly educated professional who actually did something with their lives and tried to change the world, albeit in a small way. That's real happiness. That's the real deal.

>>10587334
>art history more employable than literally all of stem except CE
OH NO NO NO NO

>>10587658
no dude you don't get it, the happiness dimwits who can't wait to get home to smoke some weed and watch the big bong therry in a state of bliss and are incapable of thinking on a deeper level is just the same as yours brainiac

>>10587584
>>10587627
>>10587658
>>10587676
This is interesting. I can't find a full list.

>>10587658
please don't compare engineers or ceo's to us, thank you

This is also interesting, attractiveness by major

>>10587627
>If you fail to be hired in something related to what you studied the what was the point?
I agree with you. That's why I think having a ranked data set of unemployment rates per major would be of interest. That would address the point of >>10587471 who associated QoL with being employed.
>It either says something about the people gravitating to that major or to the program itself.
WHAT is the quality that makes OP's chart valuable? What is the implication? Higher intelligence? How is that useful, given that the chart implies that people of higher intelligence gravitate to the top and right sides of the graph, other than for those up their to form a circle jerk over an arbitrary line of value? There is no objective metric to place that blue line on the chart and make a binary distinction between intelligent and not. Is it supposed to dictate what major you choose, or what you'll be successful at? The graph implies your success within a major is going to align with your natural abilities within verbal communication and mathematics. At best it is a projection of where you'll end up, not an indicator of some additional "value" inherit in people in a certain quadrant. My point is there is no new useful property that is going to be gleamed from assessing GRE scores across fields, and I don't understand why OP or anyone would think there is. If you want smart, technical people, the choice of majors to pick people from is inherently obvious given their content already without seeing this. You're not going to hire a mathematician to be a better potential engineer or a better history buff because they exhibit some higher intelligence value overall or have a higher overall GRE score.

>>10587687
https://hbr.org/2018/11/the-best-performing-ceos-in-the-world-2018
Engineers are CEOs. Know your place.

>>10587691
this hasardous curve fitting rustles my jimmies

>>10587658
>(Dumb people's) surface level ignorant happiness is not true happiness (compared to a) highly educated professional who actually did something with their lives and tried to change the world.
Citation and an objective metric needed, fuckwad. Your assumption that intelligence is a universal, objective value that supersedes and improves the quality of happiness, an inherently subjective value, is a ridiculous claim. I'm am of the opinion that increasing education and intelligence of people is something that is valuable to strive for, but that is entirely subjective and specific to me and other like-minded people. Given the current human condition, and I believe it will be the case forever, you cannot educate everyone or increase their intelligence equally as we are just all born with different abilities. You can't necessarily one your mind to an equal level to everyone else either, so to devalue people on the ability to be intelligent and educated alone is fucking retarded. I'm just not going to let them be my mathematician.

>>10587708
intelligence actually correlates with a higher quality of life or at least that's what I've read, although according to the first result on Google https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01078818
it doesn't

I think it'd be self explanatory. if you're dumb, people take advantage of you more, you make less money, you make poorer decisions. I'd think being smarter would give you a higher quality of life.

At the end of the day, someone who double majors in Physics and Philosophy is going to probably be smarter and more educated than someone who majored in anything else. Those are the opposite ends of the spectrum of quantatative and qualitative, so to major in both will make you very well rounded as a human being. You will have a very good understanding of science, mathematics, research, and you will have a good vocabulary, and know how to write and speak/debate with superior articulation, as well as a whole lot of knowledge on the humanities.

>>10587753
and if you aren't lucky, you will be unemployed, working at Starbucks, or in graduate school. If going to university to become a superior version of yourself is the goal, then physics+philosophy is a great idea, possibly the best.

>>10587658
>n-n-no none of those people are ACKSHYUALLY happy

>>10587766
t. only thinks about what he's going to do on the weekend

>>10587691
post the real version

>>10587769

>>10587771
I made that but I think that I messed up the position.

- Wanted to be in physics falling for science popularizes but soon realized it's just pattern matching
- So chose EE but realized job is not that high paying to worth the effort
- So changed to CS as it suppose to be high paying and I fell for AI meme, did it for two years, realized the supposed high demand is made up and the sort of AI cs is interested in is retarded and doesn't get anywhere close to human mind
- So changed to philosophy, even here though half the professors and philosophers we study are legit retarded, but this still gets one closer to other fields to understanding fundamental questions

I go to a cheap college and super poor so I get my college shenanigans paid for by govt. No post-graduate plan other than to look up and applying for all the govt program for poor people -if a web thing I am building for normies doesn't take off.

>>10587779
>physics is pattern matching
>engineering isn't worth the effort
hmmmm... you sound like a weenie but I'm not sure
it's not like you really answer any questions in philosophy. you learn to win arguments.

>>10587779
>but this still gets one closer to other fields to understanding fundamental questions

Anyone good at material science would peak all of these charts.
The problem is... i don't think anyone as of yet has been smart enough to actually be "good" at material science...

>>10587278
I would expect that of philosophy. Ontology and Epistimology especially.
I really think what this data shows us is pretty strong evidence to the notion that the g-factor is at least separable into two domains. visual-spacial and linguistic.
Ultimately the best semiotic representation of knowledge in a human mind would be both a visual-spacial and linguistic model that is unified as it utilizes the most of the available heuristics, assuming that these aren't mutually competitive at some point. However to create such models you need to be high in both intellectual domains.
Foundations require the most pattern recognition abilities to create both visual-spacial and linguistic metaphors. The more metaphors you can create, the closer to a true abstract/general conceptualization you can get. By utilizing both domains, more metaphors are thus found, and a further refinement or revolutionary thinking you achieve at foundational levels.
Just look at Chris Langan he clearly is extremely high in both domains. It's literally a model which reinterprets a visual-spacial mathematical/physical understanding of the universe as a linguistic one, thereby attempting a unification of both methods of thinking by showing equivalencies of syntax and space.

>>10587821
this is so dumb

>>10587794
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dp8aTYUrPi0

>>10587867
>.t fell for the philosophy is dumb meme instead of realizing it's superiority

>>10587887
I'm not talking about that. I'm saying the verbose bullshit along with the Chris langan charlatan plug is dumb.

>>10587906
Never said he is right, I only said he attempted it. I think anyone who is high in both domains will end up trying to bridge the knowledge from one to the other in some way.

>>10587879
sure, but how does this help you make money, start a business, have an employer hire you etc...
you can live in your car and huff your own farts all day thinking about the meaning of x and y but what does it matter

>>10587779
>chose EE but realized job is not that high paying to worth the effort
forbes ranks it as a top paying bachelors degree?

>>10588005

Why do you value

> make money, start a business, have an employer hire

higher than

> live in your car and huff your own farts all day thinking about the meaning of x and y

There are phenomenons happening in front of me, some of them I can apparently control, there is no logical way we can get our head around existence, none of the interpretation of qm makes any sense, you can never see thing in themselves, reason is apparently a thing we are suppose to trust but no idea why, there is no telling if a passerby will push me in front of a bus or if a strangelet will destroy our planet, p value bs in science, statics has multiple interpretation and no clear winner. If I am well fed and can reduce my chance of non-existence, I don't see any real clear reason to why one would be better than other. Something being better is also a value question and it's it's own complexities.

Besides that I know enough to land a moderately paying programming job if I want to, but the problem is nearly every tech companies are highly unethical in their core business model.

Doth anyone notice how thou images 'ranking' the skills of various majors never present any source or citation? Orbulon is suspicious.

>>10588057
fuck off orbulon, were not doing this shit today

>>10588050
When I looked it up, CS projection had(still do?) much more demand and much higher pay

>>10587771
Absolutely halal

>>10588081
Whomst is't thou?

>>10588151

>>10588056
you are a goofball

>>10588084
You're talking about job, they're talking about majors. Many EEs get coding jobs.

>>10587223
>mfw everything below the "barrier of intelligence" has contributed much more lifesaving and quality-of-life improving technologies than anything above it.

>>10587334
>>10587471
>300k starting!!!!

>>10588283
Sounds like something someone who is below the barrier of intelligence would say.

>>10588283
t. physical education major

>>10587471
Based ChemE reporting

>>10588575
>Based ChemE reporting
it's only that high because of petroleum. if you are a chemical engineer but you are not working with oil companies, the actual salary is lower.

>>10587753
>majoring in philosophy
is there anything more ironic? paying a university to teach you how to think about how to think? in addition 9/10 professors will have the same opinions. lmao how retarded

>>10588499
>>10588574
Based wagelet cope

>>10589565
I mean, pedagogy is a legitimately amazing field and having to self teach it was annoying as fuck but super rewarding. I really wish they had full scale classes in highschool or undergrad that taught how to make memory palaces and stuff like that.

>>10587708
>>10587584
It matters

>>10589835

>>10587658
> implying CEOs aren't just highly paid fuckwits

>>10587278
Philosophy is the undergrad of choice for premed.

>>10587658
>no kids detected

>>10588057
Orbulon?

>>10590329
That's false.

>>10590359
Maybe I was thinking of pre-law

>>10590365
That's false.

>>10590379
It’s number 3. I’d say that’s significant.

>>10590386
Actually tied for #2

>>10590386
>>10590400
You can't even be #1 in your own area. That's pathetic.

>>10587334
>mathematics is the number three most unemployable major
Is that true?

>>10587320

Most of the physicists who worked on the Manhattan project had at least a little philosophical education and all of them emphasised its importance to them.

Bishop Berkeley laid the groundwork for Quantum Physics.

>>10590821

I think that chart is garbage bro.

>>10587684
>study economics and statistics at university
>never first in post grad employment rates, median career earnings, GRE scores or happiness, but not too far away
>mfw

>>10587584
>>10587627

If you're measuring happiness, I think that underemployment may be a better metric. If you're unemployed, that sucks. However if the only job you can get is at McDonald's, that's even worse.

pic related

>>10591063
To elaborate, that means that you finally just said "fuck it" settled

>>10587710
and in twenty years they will be computer scientists.

>>10591063
>math at 30+%
>physics at 31+%
>misc. physical science at 35+%
>philosophy at 50+%
>economics at 39+%
>finance at 37+%
>chemistry at 35+%
>biology at 44+%

SIR MAY I TAKE YOUR ORDER SIR

>>10587771
>physics appears out of nowhere
So what we do know is that one of you is butthurt enough to shop out physics or add it in.

COPE
O
P
E

>>10591063
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HOLY SHIT AAAAAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAAHHAHAHA

>>10591126
I made the image maybe two days ago

>>10591063
>I majored in ph-
YEAH I'LL TAKE A NUMBER 5, A NUMBER 2, A LARGE COKE-

>>10591063
>>10591120
>>10591130
>>10591156
To add to that chart, I also came across this paper:

https://ualr.edu/alnolen/2015%20Nolen%20Vander%20Putten%20&%20Hastings%20College%20Major%20and%20ASD.pdf


pic also related

>>10591210
Also from the same paper

>>10587691
>>10587771
>>10591139
Which one?

>>10591228
I took out the physics in the left image

>>10591210
>>10591213
I don't know what to think

>>10591391
After extensive research, it appears as though its easier for engineers and CS people to get jobs despite having terrible conversation skills and having the largest population of autists out of every major in this study.

However, there are two jobs which are more employable than engineers and computer scientists: special education and elementary education teachers, which make up most of the faculty of the engineering departments.

I'll let you put two and two together.

>>10591466
Engineering and CS majors btfo

>>10591466
Autism pays. I'm surprised that architecture is only 26%. I thought it was supposed to be very high.

>>10591503
Same here actually. Perhaps several years of high unemployment rates discouraged people from majoring in architecture, thus driving down the supply? I'm tired AF, but this is pretty interesting shit so I'm going to do a more thorough analysis on the data tomorrow.

Not even autistic, stats/econometrics just give me an erection for whatever reason

>>10587820
Based af fellow mat sci

>>10591213
What is this supposed to say?

>>10587334
>theology most employable field
Athecucks btfo for all eternity

>>10592228
it's because they all have "jobs" working practically for free and that's not underemployed for them but typical.

>>10591019
Kek, based econ anon.

SAT scores by major is a useful indicator for undergraduate degrees. The GRE score is only for intended graduate program, so we have no idea the majors of who is earning these scores and all that by his says is that physic, math, and philosophy/classics graduate programs are filled with possibly smarter people.
You don't have to major in physics to go to graduate school for physics. We need SAT score charts like this.

>>10593439

>>10593439
>>10593464
multi/interdisciplinary studies is double majoring, typically in areas that are somewhat related, to have multiple perspectives on one subject or to combine them into something new.
>biology + chemistry used to be typical but is now it's own discipline: Biochemistry
>economics + history
>physics + math
etc

>>10591019
and you are far and away one of the least useful degrees. :)

Does the tier of the college matter all that much when it comes to finding a well paying job? I'm getting a lot of points from both sides of the argument and it all seems inconclusive to me.

Could this just be due to entrance requirements? I studied my ass off for the GMAT and got 99%ile and landed myself a spot at a top business school. That being said a lot of the lower GRE majors have lower requirements so why would I study my ass off if acceptance is almost guaranteed at say 80%ile.

>>10595345
possibly and this is why the SAT scores
>>10593439
>>10593464
matter more

>>10587735
IQlets may have lower quality of life, but maybe that doesn't matter when ignorance is bliss.

>>10593439
>Education below average performance at school
really makes u think

>>10587223
Yo why are petroleum and chemical engineering so far away from each other? And how is materials science the closest of all the engineering fields t the blue line?
>doubt.png

>>10587658
>IF YOU’RE NOT SLAVING YOUR LIFE AWAY TO MAKE MONEY YOU’RE NOT HAPPY
Lol

>>10595345
Is 99% GMAT really all it took? By "top business school" you mean the like of Wharton, Stanford, Sloan, HBS, etc. right? I thought they looked for career diversity as well?

>>10587658
Everybody has something that comforts them on an ultimate level. If a man is able to achieve true contentment through farming, he should be a farmer. If a man cannot achieve true contentment through anything less than changing the world, he should change the world.

The content farmer will be comfortable on their deathbed. Will you?

>>10595861
Yes. It definitely takes more, but I was in the military with a deployment so I could talk about stuff among other things. The trap a lot of applicants make is applying too young. The average MBA is 27/28, so most the denials are guys right out of undergrad even if they have stellar GPA/GMAT. The main focus point is why you need the degree really. I spent the most talking about my future plans and why the MBA fit. You use your GPA/GMAT to simple say I chose x school as I'm an above qualified applicant, or however you want to spin it

>>10587428
The GRE is a standardized test, retard. If everybody were to achieve the same score, it would defeat the purpose of the test.

>>10587658
Why don't you start not living off of those people's work then? I suggest you start living in the woods, hunt for your own food, build your own house and appliances, since blue collar work is so above your level. Arrogant prick.