/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5409026]

Does anyone here get as depressed as I do when I think about a future in stem? I love science, but everyone knows that no matter how brilliant you are there's nothing you'll ever accomplish or do that can't easily be filled by someone else. At times I honestly feel I could contribute more to society doing something related to art or storytelling, at least that way I would have the potential to create something truly unique and captivating. Pic related, it's the best damn piece of storytelling known to man

[Anonymous No.5409063]

Everyone *could* do the same job that you want to do. That doesn't mean anyone will. Do you just want to sit around and do the experiments people tell you to do, or do you want to actually create the experiments yourself, and think up new ways to do things? Because if so, then all you have to do is be the first.

Yeah, you can feel shitty, everyone does, but why? Use those feelings as motivation, you aren't going to be just another piece.

[Anonymous No.5409202]

Think of it this way: All of a trees leaves have the same goal; to collect light in order to supply the tree with the energy it needs to grow and survive. If society is that tree and light is the unknown then we must each take on the job of the leaves. We must take in the light that is new to us and convert this knowledge that is new to us into a form of energy that can be used by the rest of society. Your purpose may or may not be to be a leaf at the top of the tree which is reaching towards a height that no other leaf has experienced. Either way though the main goal is to share with others that which you have learned yourself because it may be your perspective that allows someone to understand a concept that they could not understand before. Help the tree thrive and in doing so you yourself will thrive.

[noko No.5409219]

yup you are replaceable and not special...
If you love science do it cause you love it. not because your special but because you CAN do what you love to do.
burger flippers are replaceable also

[Anonymous No.5409218]

Hey OP, what's the point of even making an impact on the world when you're going to die one day and wont be there to perceive it.

What's the point of living?

[Anonymous No.5409228]

OP I'm an artist.

I feel guilty every day for being a pretentious fuck and not a scientist.

It's okay. The feeling is mutual. My grandfather told me of how after he got his PhD, he felt incomplete, and he stopped shrugging off the humanities for the first time in his life.

Feynman played the drums in old age.

Day man, aaah!

Fighter of the night man, aaah!

That's how people are. You might think something's ghey the first half of your life, but spend the second half of your life doing it.

[Anonymous No.5409234]

>>5409219

False, we are replaceable and special. Each of us is an individual of unfathomable detail whose probability of reoccurring is close is infinitesimal at best.

Yet, we are made out of similar components, and that structural similarity is what makes us replaceable.

[Anonymous No.5409235]

You need to do something that gives you satisfaction on the inside, and not from what the outside world sees from you. You need to set your own goals, and only then will your accomplishments be meaningful.

[Anonymous No.5409265]

do a little of both. i'm studying music production during my down time

[Anonymous No.5409284]

>>5409228
>>5409265
And these guys are right, who says you need a degree in art to be good at it? You kinda need a degree in science to be good at it, but picking up an instrument or a brush is just a thing you can do, and you can study and learn about art in your spare time.

[Anonymous No.5409304]

>>5409284

>You kinda need a degree in science to be good at it

False. You can learn everything the school is going to teach you through books and the internet.

[Anonymous No.5409312]

>>5409228
Haha nice

Well OP, science has a lot to do with sacrifice too. Science has not been an individual enterprise. Even Newton said, "if I have seen further, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."

I'm a bit of a misanthrope. But I do think humanity can redeem itself with the accumulation of truth/knowledge.

I'm just an average joe. I got my biochemistry degree and working on a phd in biochem with my project on neuroscience: a young scientific frontier on the most complex machine for at least a thousand stars around.

I will sacrifice 8 hours of my day or more, everyday to make an insignificant contribution to science.

At least I helped a little.

I fill my time with art. I listen to music in transit to everywhere.

I take jujitsu and boxing classes.

I have a complex physical conditioning schedule.

My point is that even though the chances are low that I get a Nobel someday, I did my best and made the most of every minute of my life.

I also enjoy my downtime too.

I try not to worry.

Good luck op.

[Anonymous No.5409340]

>>5409304
my point was more along the lines of actually getting a job and money, but yes, i suppose you're right

[Anonymous No.5409352]

>>5409304

Yes, but until the shackles of credentialism are shed, they are still the way society evaluates your knowledge.

Hopefully that'll be fixed, soon.

[Anonymous No.5409387]

>>5409304

You can't do practical lab work at home.

[Anonymous No.5409405]

>>5409387
Why not?

[Anonymous No.5409415]

>>5409304
>>You kinda need a degree in science to be good at it
>False. You can learn everything the school is going to teach you through books and the internet.

Almost entirely bullshit.
People -could- learn that way, but only -after- they have completed an education of some kind.
People do not inherently know how to teach themselves.

So you could be talking about learning a second topic of knowledge, but that's far beyond the point of finishing an education the first time and getting a job with it.

[Anonymous No.5409417]

>>5409352
>Yes, but until the shackles of credentialism are shed, they are still the way society evaluates your knowledge.


'Shackles'?
Are you pretending it is a BAD thing that people need to show they have learned something BEFORE they do it professionally?

Are you going to suggest that preventing someone from entering a field without credentials is a BAD thing?

[Anonymous No.5409418]

>>5409387
>You can't do practical lab work at home.

Sure you can.
There are dozens of areas that don't require expensive equipment or investment or containment.

You must be thinking of a specific domain of lab work.

[Anonymous No.5409419]

>>5409415
>People -could- learn that way, but only -after- they have completed an education of some kind.
How much do you mean by "an education of some kind". I've learned nothing from math or science teachers since middle school, and am currently doing a PhD.

[Anonymous No.5409423]

>>5409415

Do you not realize that high level universities are making it the norm to offer their courses, in their entirety, for free, online.

And getting a job is not part of the discussion. He said, in order to be good at science, you must have a degree in it. And that's not true at all.

[Anonymous No.5409427]

>>5409417

>Are you going to suggest that preventing someone from entering a field without credentials is a BAD thing?

Yes. If you know your shit, then why the fuck should it matter if you went to school for it?

[Anonymous No.5409428]

>>5409417

Essentially, you're paying for a permission slip to get a job in your field. Not the education.

[Anonymous No.5409431]

>>5409417

When a person is hired for a job they will have to show they are competent and proficient in their subject. All credentials do is make it just a little harder to get the job. Less people employed, they can charge more. This is one of the reasons why healthcare is so expensive in this country.

[Anonymous No.5409437]

>>5409431

>in this country

Typical American thinking his country is the only one in the world.

[Anonymous No.5409439]

>>5409423
For most people, learning a subject requires some sort of human interaction, not just material.

The level of interaction on coursera etc. is probably enough, but without this most people will get "stuck" at some point and not be able to proceed.

[Anonymous No.5409449]

>>5409415
bullshit

i did eng and law

and it taught me nothing except a set of rules, but not how think or learn

you have to know how to learn intinsically

[Anonymous No.5409450]

>>5409437
damn. I'm sorry. I feel foolish. I've smoked too much tonight.

[Anonymous No.5409469]

>>5409419
>How much do you mean by "an education of some kind". I've learned nothing from math or science teachers since middle school, and am currently doing a PhD.

I mean completing high school.

I don't believe you for an instant about not learning since you say.
You either did, all the time, and just have a bad attitude, or you are an exception (a negative example) and you know how f'ing stupid cherry-picking exceptional examples is when talking about populations in general.

I might be giving you too much credit.
Almost no one is genuinely stupid enough to believe they got nothing from their education since they were, what, 12?
And you are implying it's been entirely about your SOLO effort all the way from there to your PhD?

[Anonymous No.5409480]

>>5409419

Rethinking, I don't think you'll see the point from my previous post, so I'll reverse it:

when children are in elementary school, they have no idea how to do much of anything. They do not learn on their own how to research, cite, write complex sentences, acquire broad vocabularies, or explore areas of knowledge they don't know exist.
When children are in middle and high school, they learn how to do all of that, and are exposed to ways of thinking, methods of expression, and how others have behaved and worked. They learn about the breadth of history and the efforts of others to learn and experiment, they learn some of the depth of complex and abstract thinking, philosophy, sociology, and even get guided in personal growth.

Education does that, and nothing else.

You could not take a child of that post-elementary age and expect him to educate himself in those ways -- it would never happen, and certainly would never be as effective as the system that exists.
It exists that way BECAUSE it works, not because it is economically easy or because it moderates freedom of will or puts someone in debt to a conspired group.

However, AFTER that person has been educated with those skills, he certainly could go on to learn more, in any field. He has the skills, the awareness of the process, that makes it possible. He is guided both directly and indirectly.

Anyone who suggests he got through high school without being educated just doesn't get it at all.

[Anonymous No.5409489]

>>5409423
>Do you not realize that high level universities are making it the norm to offer their courses, in their entirety, for free, online.
A few are doing it; it is neither the norm, nor does anyone consider it equivalent learning.

No one anywhere suggested those courses are for people who did not finish a basic grade-school education, which is what I advocated.

>And getting a job is not part of the discussion. He said, in order to be good at science, you must have a degree in it. And that's not true at all.

Getting a job was indeed written in a few posts later,
But it is true that in order to be GOOD at science, you need to be EDUCATED in it.
That is to say, you do not learn how to do science solo. It requires multiple perspectives, experience in peer review, multiple directions and guidance, etc.

But consider, that I did NOT say a degree in science; I only wrote education.
A science-proper education is not a basic one, but I didn't write 'degree' at all.

(And no, we are NEVER talking about a few exceptional people, like the guy who credits no one at all, especially not teachers and professors, with helping him get a PhD.)

[Anonymous No.5409495]

>>5409427
>Yes. If you know your shit, then why the fuck should it matter if you went to school for it?

Because an official credential, with the implications of having been tested and evaluated, is the only way we have of DEMONSTRATING you know something.

Let me ask from the side:
are you suggesting it is practical, efficient, and without risk for people to go to a doctor or lawyer that has no credentials?
Remember, for almost every field YOU have no particular knowledge of how to evaluate the person's abilities.

Credentials accomplish that.
It's an important part of a society where people cannot personally know all the people they rely on.

[Anonymous No.5409499]

>>5409428
>Essentially, you're paying for a permission slip to get a job in your field. Not the education.


Entirely wrong.
You can pay all you want; without passing the qualifications, you do not get credentials.

You have managed to misrepresent the entire point of education, too, which really is to educate. It really is NOT about the fees.

[Anonymous No.5409505]

>>5409431
>When a person is hired for a job they will have to show they are competent and proficient in their subject.
This is completely wrong. You do not expect employers to test ability in such ways first; you don't give a cadaver to a potential surgeon, you expect his educators to have done that.


>All credentials do is make it just a little harder to get the job.
No, credentials make it EASIER to show you have been taught what you need.
Credentials make it harder for the UNEDUCATED to get a job, because that is not who anyone wants to get it.

>Less people employed, they can charge more.
No, credentials do not affect fees in any way. In fact, educational systems work against exactly what you suggest here; pushing people into in-demand fields where possible.

[Anonymous No.5409507]

>>5409489

>No one anywhere suggested those courses are for people who did not finish a basic grade-school education, which is what I advocated.

Nobody ever fucking said you can learn without basic grade school teachings. Why are you pulling shit out of your ass.

>You kinda need a degree in science to be good at it
>False. You can learn everything the school is going to teach you through books and the internet.

The statement was that you do not need a degree in something to be educated in something. The degree is nothing more than a piece of paper.

>Getting a job was indeed written in a few posts later,

But not in the post you were replying to. So why bring it up?

>That is to say, you do not learn how to do science solo. It requires multiple perspectives, experience in peer review, multiple directions and guidance, etc.

Which is completely available in an online course.

[Anonymous No.5409512]

>>5409499

>It really is NOT about the fees.

>MFW

[Anonymous No.5409515]

>>5409449
>i did eng and law
>and it taught me nothing except a set of rules, but not how think or learn
>you have to know how to learn intinsically


And I say you are ignoring where you learned those skills:
grade school.

You do NOT know how to learn those things intrinsically;
it is a potential instilled in you by grade school efforts.

And no, you need not have been aware of it, the teachers were doing that part.

[Anonymous No.5409531]

>>5409507
>>No one anywhere suggested those courses are for people who did not finish a basic grade-school education, which is what I advocated.
>Nobody ever fucking said you can learn without basic grade school teachings.
They said 'without an education.'

>Why are you pulling shit out of your ass.
You might not know what that phrase means.
What I am writing includes a larger meaning of 'education' than the one you were using; it is not being invented without cause or relevance.

>The degree is nothing more than a piece of paper.
I don't disagree.

>>Getting a job was indeed written in a few posts later,
>But not in the post you were replying to. So why bring it up?
It said the topic was not about getting a job, I said where I got that. Did you read the post before mine?

>Which is completely available in an online course.
I didn't write anything against doing it online.

[Anonymous No.5409540]

I feel like the only thing holding me back from quitting school and finding some basic job that pays the bills and keeps me happy is that I want to do something useful for the world. Sure, I could settle down with a job that gives me 60k a year and easy work and I wouldn't need to take difficult science courses, but what good would that do?

I guess I feel like I have a responsibility to the world; I have to improve it in some way before I leave.


WHY CAN'T I JUST BE HAPPY MASTURBATING IN AN APARTMENT AND PLAYING VIDEO GAMES?

[Anonymous No.5409551]

>>5409026
>someone else will do it

Perhaps there is expontial growth to some extent: By discovering something a few years sooner than someone else would, a few people might build on your discovery a few years sooner and make their own advancements, which will cause DOZENS of people to make advancements on those advancements a few years sooner...

Which could mean the work you do could lead to massive changes in the distant future.

(Of course all decisions you make, even the tiniest, will have drastic and far reaching consequences on the world, due to the chaoticness of the world. But the effects I described above will not be random and chaotic, but will have a net positive outcome for society.

[Anonymous No.5409557]

>>5409540

Whats the point of even making an impact when you're gonna die one day and wont be there to perceive it.

[Anonymous No.5409571]

>>5409557
I know, but I want to feel like something I did will be useful in the future. I don't really care if I witness it or if anyone remembers me

[noko No.5409613]

DUDE (dudette?)
if you are living life for others either future or now you are turd.
you are the only known being with your thoughts.
if discovering truths about the world is fun, then carry on.
memento mori
Newton, Einstein, Smith, nor Christ dropped their musings on the world for the monetary gain or historical value.
if yer so smart city bouy; why aint cha happy ?

[Anonymous No.5410336]

i love it when i see posts about those that want free education for all

it won't happen as someone is paying for the credentials

they'll defend that expenditure as if it was their job

[Anonymous No.5410344]

>>5409284
Trumpet player here.
Good luck being anything more than absolute shit without some sort of guidance. It's not even about a degree; the vast majority of people need a private teacher in order to become anything more than shit, and you learn more than technique in classes for your art in school. At least, if you're at a good one.

[Anonymous No.5410992]

>>5409557
>Whats the point of even making an impact when you're gonna die one day and wont be there to perceive it.

You cannot figure ANY value to work unless it pleases you directly?
Are you kidding me?

We should be fantastically insulted and amazed at you, this close to Christmas and New Year, times when you should have been reminded that there is more around than just YOU.

[Anonymous No.5411001]

>>5410992

>times when you should have been reminded that there is more around than just YOU.

Can you scientifically prove that there is anything other than me?

The universe only exists in the mind that perceives it. This is babbys first logic

[Anonymous No.5411029]

Does anyone here get as depressed as I do when I think about a future in art? I love story telling, but everyone knows that no matter how brilliant you are there's nothing you'll ever accomplish or do that can't easily be filled by someone else. At times I honestly feel I could contribute more to society doing something related to science and math, at least that way I would have the potential to create something truly unique and captivating. Pic related, it's the best damn piece of scientific knowledge known to man

[Anonymous No.5411056]

>>5410344
Violinist, trombonist, trumpeter, pianist, guitarist here.

My "training" was once a week for 10 minutes where I had to prove I could play scales. The rest was playing the music in front of me and playing it over and over until I was good at it. I'm not a particularly good player, by any means, but it's fun, and my friends give me all the motivation I need to keep playing.

[Anonymous No.5411087]

>>5411056

Violin is INCREDIBLY (probably impossible) hard to learn without training on proper technique. If you're saying your only training on violin was proving you could play scales, I know for a fact you're full of shit.

[Anonymous No.5411381]

>>5411001
Not going into that stupidity;
were those awful tangents yours over the last few weeks?

Get over the dumb idea -- it was stupid in the beginning, it's stupid now, and it won't derail a thread.

[Anonymous No.5411386]

>>5411001
>This is babbys first logic
Right;
but we did so hope you'd progress beyond the simple thoughts and learn more.

[Anonymous No.5411400]

>>5411087
of course he is;
he's probably not counting all the reading, listening examples, and training courses as 'education.'

Maybe he thinks 'education' can only mean formalized and paid instructors in schoolrooms (which he probably also had, but isn't counting!)

It seems bizarre to me that anyone believes having no instructors is a virtue.

[Anonymous No.5412748]

>>5409417

They are outdated bureaucracy.

I guess what I should say is the INFRASTRUCTURE of our credentials.

The way our education system evaluates knowledge could be much more logically organized and waste much less time.

Textbooks should be distributed via PDF, rather than making kids pay 50 bucks to rent an old book that they get the chance to read a quarter of...

Look at things like Khanacademy, and how it has a tiered digital system that forces the student to master one lesson before moving on to the next. This kind of shit should become common.

[Anonymous No.5412784]

>>5411087
notice he uses the phrase "I'm not a particularly good player"

[Anonymous No.5412796]

>>5412784

You don't understand. Even to get a violin to sound like something other than obnoxious screeching it takes TONS of training on proper technique. That's different from being a "not very good player". And the fact that he states he can play that and all the other instruments he listed is evidence that he's full of shit.

[Anonymous No.5412849]

>>5412796
no i don't think you understand
i've played the violin for ~10 years and ive played in state-regional level student orchestras
i know
it takes probably 1-2 years of dedicated training to sound good
about 2-4 of playing every once in a while

[Anonymous No.5412852]

>>5412796
i was the first one to post a reply to you
i didn't mean good i meant better than obnoxious screeching
and actually, i'd say less than a year to get to that point with dedicated training and 1-3 years playing every once in a while

[Anonymous No.5412862]

>>5412849

So then you should know that if he's saying his only training was 10 minutes of proving he could play scales, he's obviously full of shit.

So why are you defending him? I don't understand

[Anonymous No.5412887]

>>5412862
idk he probably is
we don't know how long he played

[Anonymous No.5412892]

>>5412887
i mean how many weeks he did this 10 min practice