/sci/ - Science & Math

MEATS.

>muh secret club

But why?

>The STEM to STEAM initiative, championed by the Rhode Island School of Design (RISD), ...

Ohh okay then

So what comes after? STEAMS for social science? SHTEAMS for humanities? SHTEAMPS for philosophy?

>>7058238
Whats wrong with art

>>7058286
Nothing at all. It is in a different category than science and math. It's just that the arts and humanities are trying to stitch themselves to better paying and more respected professions

>>7058286

Nothing is wrong with the Arts, just a bunch of hurt butt anons.

Though the it's the "design" part of the Arts thats being technically emphasize here since the Art is the main field that pushes for design. But then it would be called STEMD or DEMTS or TSMDE and that just doesn't have a good ring to it.

So STEAM sounds better.

>>7058286
Nothing. It just doesn't have any connection to STEM fields, while STEM fields all have connections to one another in some way.

>>7058286
The problem with art nowadays is it's too subjective. Literally anything can be art and if ONE person likes it it's "good" art. It's giving art a bad reputation.

Back in the Renaissance art was objectively good or it simply wasn't art.

>>7058308
>art
>objectively good

Looks like someone doesn't understand art

>>7058259
My cousin went there, she thinks she's hot shit.

>>7058297
Shouldn't you stimulate that side of your brain as well? Isn't creativity just as important as logic?

>>7058333
Not that anon, but isn't the connection a little too abstract?

Then again, the same goes for the more theoretical fields.

>>7058333
Sure, but that doesn't make art somehow connected to STEM fields. Creativity can't be taught, anyhow. You either have the capacity for it in some measure or you don't.

Trying to become creative by taking art classes is like trying to make a mirror by polishing a brick.

>>7058310
>Looks like someone doesn't understand art

There's no standardized definition of what good art is. For this reason, technically nobody can truly understands art. If there was a standardized definition of what constitutes "good art" then you could objectively measure it.

This failing to apply the scientific method to art is a direct result of the stigma that art is for those weak in science. It attracts people who are bad in science which only reinforces the stigma or belief like some sort of self fulfilling prophecy or placebo effect.

>>7058238
CS major here, I do learn to draw in free time too. Drawing basic stuffs like anatomy or scenery require you to calculate everything in your fucking head all the time.
I actually admire many artists due to this, only after a few steps to sketch and my head started to burn because the parameters keep stacking up.
I don't like those who skip basic stuffs and go directly into "muh abstract art" though. That's bullshit.
But generally art is not very related with STEM, except for basic calculation and proportion. The rest is depending on the other side of the brain.

>>7058338
>Creativity can't be taught, anyhow.
The skills to express creativity can be. And I'd argue that learning about art opens up news sources of inspiration, so in a way you're being taught how to be more creative.

>>7058351
And that would imply... what? Crossing disciplines?

>>7058352
Er, no. I didn't say anything about the STEAM initiative, just that I disagree with you about teaching creativity.

>>7058338
It's funny how 'smart' high-IQ math and science nerds know so little about art they fail to even understand the purpose of studying it.

You don't study art because you aren't creative and want to become creative, like you study physics because you don't know any physics and want to learn about physics. You study art because you already are creative, and you want to dedicate a lot of time to exploring and applying your creativity and developing your technical skills.

The latter goal, at least, should be obvious to STEM nerds, drawing or painting or performing or composing music is a skill like any other and there is some technical ability associated with it. Regardless of creativity some 14 year old with a guitar isn't going to produce as good music as jimi hendrix because he just doesn't have the physical ability to do so, and for any artistic subject studying techniques and practicing to get better at them is obviously important if you want to master them.

But creativity isn't like some abstract trait that either you have it or you don't, that's retarded, you develop your creativity by being creative, if you spend a month working on some long term arts project coming up with ideas to finish it and make it better along the way you will probably be able to come up with better ideas in the future. Spend four years dedicating hundreds of hours to doing that in college and you will end up with much stronger creative talent not to mention incomparably better technical skills than some retard NEET or STEM autist who just picked up a paintbrush or a guitar and watched a beginner lesson on youtube.

>>7058359
Oh, that wasn't me. Just chiming in, sorry.

>>7058341
>non-STEAM major here

>>7058310
>muh subjectivism
>hurr durr art can't be objectively good or bad

>>7058364
I mostly agree with your post. Nonetheless it doesn't justify obtaining a degree in arts. Arts are a hobby and not a full-time job. People who are interested in arts can of course read about arts and look at famous pieces of arts, but that knowledge alone is hardly worth paying for. Conversely not everyone who has an arts degree automatically becomes accepted as an artist and quite frankly many of them are pretentious without having much talent. I'm fine with people doing arts, but they should do it in their free time after working a real job.

>>7058238
One of these things is not like the other.

>>7058383
Lel.

>>7058383
Yeah well fuck your value judgments bro. Life is not about money, if you go to school and study something you aren't interested in to get a job spending all day at a place you dont want to be at doing something you dont want to do with a bunch of people you dont want to be with you are going to be miserable regardless of having a bit more money to spend. If you really want to be an artist you are a hell of a lot better off going for it, giving it your all and trying to make it work out than just giving up immediately because it's hard and settling for a second-rate career with more job security, even if you end up having to work a shitty dead end day job to support your artistic career it's better than giving up and never reaching that level of talent.

Arts degrees are not for everyone, there are plenty of people just doing it because they're somewhat interested and think they are supposed to get a college degree, if you're not really passionate about it you should study something useful but if you are, you shouldn't even consider settling for something else.

But you need to remember not everyone is smart enough for a serious STEM career either, not everyone can handle grad school or do well in engineering and ending up with a 2.2 GPA in engineering or with a BS in biology is not any better than ending up with an art degree.

But absolutely nobody should go to school to get a 'real job' instead of pursuing their interests just to fulfill the social expectation of 'go to college, get a real job, get married, get a mortgage, keep working and spending money on consumer crap like a normal person', fuck that shit.

>>7058429
No matter how "interested" you are in arts, if you have no talent, you won't become an artist. So studying arts is pointless. If you have talent on the other hand, then you don't need an arts degree because you already know how to do it. So you could obtain a real degree instead and do arts in your free time.

>>7058238
Top lel
now throw in women studies to completely fuck it.

>>7058441
>If you have talent on the other hand, then you don't need an arts degree because you already know how to do it.
But that's wrong. Being naturally creative doesn't magically give you the skills needed to be a painter or a composer. You've gotta learn them somehow.

There's nothing wrong with art (although there is definitely something with with artISTS...), but it doesn't belong. STEAM is dumb. It should stay STEM.

>>7058429
>bro
stopped reading
dumb american

Science humanities infotmation technology when

>>7058383

Anon no field of study really deserves or needs a degree and a "real job" is just doing action someone is willing to pay or compensate you for regardless of the activity.

>>7058308

>The problem with art nowadays is it's too subjective

No, the problem is people fail to realize that Art has a rigour that's up to the indivdual rather than a adopted universal standard. That's where "the art is never finished, just abandoned" quote comes from. Some people spend years on a single piece of art while others spend just a few hours and it shows too.

>science tech engineering and math
ftfy

>>7058297
Programming, marketing, visualization.

Fuck did you even take an engineering graphics design class

>what is aesthetic design

>>7058383
>CGI animation artist(Pixar/every 3d commercial)
>animation
Because fuck cartoons right?
>Effects artist muh marketing once more
>Graphics design
lets just pretend that companies actually want shitty promotion and raw black and blue html websites
>hand/computer drawn art
because all your bideo geemu textures are computer generated right? and cover art too right?

Oh lets not forget the ugly ass house you live in or the disgusting vehicle you drive, I'd like to see the architect/designer behind those.

>>7058372
imagine being the person that got so angry after CLT got into the subjectivity camp that they actually made this

>>7058341
I do art on the side too, it's true that if you want to be good at realism you have to do a shit ton of studying. Not only form and figures, but also some basic physics to make things "look right" (gravity, optics) as well as knowing material properties to be able to express the textures visually.
Composition/design can get very technical too, like graphic design work with logos, they have to use the golden ratio and shit. It does require skill, thought, and knowhow.

I'd still consider art as separate from STEM, though. Absolutely not all fields of art are so rigorous and technical, and way too much art panders to "feels." Might as well include literature in STEM. There are some important science/math works in literature, right?

>>7058441
Read >>7058364 you fucking autist.

If you have talent and don't study art, you will never become an artist worth half a shit because your technical skills will suck, you won't be very creative and will just be starting to apply your natural ability, and you won't have anywhere near the time, practice or experience to go anywhere with it.

If you treat it like a hobby, the most it will ever be is a hobby, you will never accomplish anything of note. How many hobby mathematicians prove original theorems in their free time after working their day jobs? In the 21st century, not the fucking 1800s. How many hobby physicists or chemists have any impact at all on their field in their spare time after work? Why are you so obtuse you would imagine art is any different?

If you have no talent, you definitely shouldn't be studying art but if you have talent and are driven the idea 'lol study a real degree do it in your free time and you'll be just as good!' is downright retarded.

The only art that matters is graphics design. Every other is a waste of time in the 21st century.

>>7058238
>Art

>>7058679
You can actually study art without having to pay 60k a year for art school.
Anon was saying if you have talent you don't have to pay for any sort of degree.

Also for the record, some amateurs actually have made notable impacts in science, one particular field I can think of now is astronomy.

Btw, a career in "art" is like 70% business and marketing your stuff. That's why even no-talents can make it.

I'm talented skill-wise in drawing but it's not fulfilling to me. It's not objective enough to make an impact in the way I like, so now I'm mainly studying physics and engineering. I still improve art on the side for fun though.

>>7058238
But...but, anon. They are all different types of intelligence...aren't they? :'(

they should add medicine though
STEMM

>>7058445
make sure the W comes before M when you do this

THESHIT are the degrees of the future:
Travel and leisure, hotel management, education, sports management, hospitality, interior design, tourism. If you're not in one of these fields you're retarded and will never make money.

>>7058824
Why? If we add one trade, then people will push for another and soon it'll be STEMMHVAC.

>>7058238
Philosophy should be added way before art.

>>7058708
This dick measuring contest only matters to people who attended plebbit schools. A philosophy major from Harvard can get a better paying job than any of you fags.

Pro tip: if it's not at least top 20, it's shit.

STEM are grouped together because they share a set of defining characteristics
>concerned with objective reality and/or highly formal theories
>rigorous and sound logic and reasoning required
>direct applications create objectively measurable value
>all interconnected, all depend on each other

comp sci requires math and electrical engineering to be of any use.
physics requires math.
chem requires physics and math.
all engineering requires physics, plus various other field-specific things.
comp sci helps improve efficiency in all of the other fields.
chemistry, physics and engineering all contribute to the infrastructure needed to do all the other fields.
'Art' just doesn't fit in there at all. it's not objective. it doesn't help any of the other fields. it does not produce material value at all. no application to technology in any form.
jut no. keep to your faggy liberal arts colleges.

>>7058512
>no field of study really deserves or needs a degree
Complete bullshit. If you want to be a scientist working on something relevant, you have to have a degree. If you want to be an engineer working on something that will actually affect the state of things, you have to have a degree.

If you want to practice law.

If you want to be a doctor.

The list goes on.

For fuck's sake you even have to be licensed in order to be a plumber or an electrician or a heating and a/c repairman.

>>7059459
So biology isn't STEM?

>>7058238
It didn't have to be like this.

I don't hate art, but keep it the fuck away from my field.

>tfw art majors trying to get some of that sweet sweet engineering funding.

>>7058372
art CAN'T be objectively good or bad. The value of art is determined by the viewer; there is no objective standard against which art can be measured.

>>7058364
You develop your creativity by being creative, yes, this is true.

You do not have to pay to go to school for that. Especially not in the age of free information and instruction.

>>7059467
>heavily interconnected with chemistry
>uses a ton of physics and chem related math
>rigorous experiments
>HUGE practical relevance in medicine and pharmaceuticals

i dont see why not? biology is usually included in the 'sciences' part of STEM.

>>7059495
>uses a ton of physics and chem related math
>rigorous experiments
lol

>>7059496
>what is biochem
>what is microbiology
>what is genetics
>what is bioinformatics

biollogy isn't just writing down how different animals look

>>7059498
> 90% results cannot be replicated
> rigorous experiments
choose one

>>7059467
biology isn't really a science. biochemistry is where predictive power stops

>>7059495
>uses a ton of physics and chem related math
no.

>>7058238
>non-scientific fields trying to pretend to be scientific

Absolutely disgusting. This type of thinking almost killed History as a living academic discipline. Academic History came extremely close to becoming nothing more than one giant Teleology in the 19th century due the need to try to apply science to everything.
Leave it to artfags to tread already tread upon ground

>>7059511
>Biochemistry experiments
>90% irreplicable

>>7059555
Biology experiments*