Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

white_wolf wrote:
If they would have checked the math the challenger would not have exploded.

I know it's hard to understand, but reality doesn't change just because it suits your argument. Might as well rename this thread to "Reality is a Cheap Shot against my argument" at this point

 Ouze wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Math is one of the liberal arts, are we pro liberal arts now?

Only once NASA got some people with math degrees, which didn't happen until 1989 or so.

This thread started off in a bad place but man oh man, it's slid.

I should clarify that this is to do with the launch itself. No mathematicians made the call to launch at hustin until after the Challenger It was mostly Engineers and technical advices. My Math Teacher who holds a masters in math told me this story and mostly I have left some details out. I will have as about it this semester.

white_wolf wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

white_wolf wrote:
I am not saying Liberal has no place in the world I am only saying that getting a degree in liberal arts is almost unnecessary and that time and money could be better spend truly practicing one's craft.

I am not saying STEM subjects have no place in the world I am only saying that getting a degree in STEM subjects is almost unnecessary and that time and money could be better spend [sic] truly practicing one's craft.

Seriously, why couldn't one just stay at home and REALLY practice equations?

And if you think there's no life and death involved in the liberal arts, you try deciding whether to go to war against someone or not when you've got a translator who stayed at home to focus on his hobby of programming.

You can but unlike liberal arts Stem has standards. I can lay equations in front of anyone with a STEM degree and they will be able to tell me if they are right or wrong. I could lay a book in front of anyone with a liberal arts degree and they will each have different interpretations of what its meaning is.

That's on you for making a sloppy question then. If you didn't word the question to specify the model used then yes, you'll get a bunch of different answers.

white_wolf wrote:


Also math can tell you if you should go to war, Do you have a high statistical chance of victory? Yes? Then you can go to war. As for the morality of it well that falls into your conundrum of Philosophy. Now if you do go those engineers and scientist will make sure you win the war.

And what are the variables you put into the analysis of whether you have a high chance of winning? Lots and lots of anthropology and sociology.

 dogma wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

True to an extent. But when you look at Liberal Art job opportunities, they for the most part truly are jobs that having this degree really won't give you a leg up on someone who doesn't.

http://career-advice.monster.com/salary-benefits/salary-information/high-paying-jobs-for-generalists/article.aspx

Edit: That's what Monster.com brings up for Liberal Arts.

Apparently economics is not a liberal art anymore.

*shrugs*

I think your "arts degree" may tend varies school to school. Looking at University of Michigan for example, Cell and Molecular Biology and Biomedical Engineering is considered an Arts degree. I don't think you get a more classic example of a STEM degree then that though.

My school didn't even have a 'Liberal Arts' department. Humanities, Communications, Math/Computer Science, Law, Education, and Political Science were their own departments and offered their own "Bachelors of the Arts in _______."

 LordofHats wrote:

white_wolf wrote:
If they would have checked the math the challenger would not have exploded.

I know it's hard to understand, but reality doesn't change just because it suits your argument. Might as well rename this thread to "Reality is a Cheap Shot against my argument" at this point

"Boisjoly correctly predicted, based on earlier flight data, that the O-rings on the rocket boosters would fail if the shuttle launched in cold weather."

So yes the math Works. It only becomes a case of If they would have heeded the Math it would not have exploded. They done goofed

Most schools I've examined don't have a Liberal Arts department. They have an Arts school and a Sciences school. Today though it seems many sciences fall under arts, especially those dealing with Mathematics.

At any rate, you can't just point at an Arts degree and say its worthless because its an Arts degree. Now, you take some of the more pictured examples of "Liberal Arts" such as Afroamerican and African Studies, Womens Studies, Philosphy, etc... you end to start getting towards those degrees where you're finding those dead end career paths where you are most likely going to end up settling for a job that you could have gotten right out of high school.

For the record, I'm currently 2/3rds of the way through an Arts degree of my own.

white_wolf wrote:


So yes the math Works. It only becomes a case of If they would have heeded the Math it would not have exploded. They done goofed

No one argues that math doesn't work. People are pointing out the inanity of thinking that NASA and its contractors didn't have any employees capable of math ( You do realize that Engineers and Technicians are basically just jobs in applied mathematics right?), and that the Challenger disaster was not caused by bad math but by unethical practices and group think (I wonder what field studies ethics and social theory...). Likewise, the failure of the Mars Rover, while mathmatical in nature, would not have been fixed by having a mathematics professor on site. They needed better project management, because someone should have laid out "all parts are to use metric units" or "hey, we programmed this to use yards instead of meters."

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

white_wolf wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

white_wolf wrote:
I am not saying Liberal has no place in the world I am only saying that getting a degree in liberal arts is almost unnecessary and that time and money could be better spend truly practicing one's craft.

I am not saying STEM subjects have no place in the world I am only saying that getting a degree in STEM subjects is almost unnecessary and that time and money could be better spend [sic] truly practicing one's craft.

Seriously, why couldn't one just stay at home and REALLY practice equations?

And if you think there's no life and death involved in the liberal arts, you try deciding whether to go to war against someone or not when you've got a translator who stayed at home to focus on his hobby of programming.

You can but unlike liberal arts Stem has standards. I can lay equations in front of anyone with a STEM degree and they will be able to tell me if they are right or wrong. I could lay a book in front of anyone with a liberal arts degree and they will each have different interpretations of what its meaning is.

That's on you for making a sloppy question then. If you didn't word the question to specify the model used then yes, you'll get a bunch of different answers.

white_wolf wrote:


Also math can tell you if you should go to war, Do you have a high statistical chance of victory? Yes? Then you can go to war. As for the morality of it well that falls into your conundrum of Philosophy. Now if you do go those engineers and scientist will make sure you win the war.

And what are the variables you put into the analysis of whether you have a high chance of winning? Lots and lots of anthropology and sociology.

Variables for war?
Military Strength
-Standing Numbers
-Training
-Gear
-Logistics
Time to build and switch over to a war time Economy
Threat of nuclear retaliation
Office of defence Warfare
Troop and equipment replacement.
Air superiority

Are they a threat?
-Have the made aggressive moods or attacked allies?
-could they possibly surpass us if we did nothing.
should we begin to invest in better military technology (could turn into a Cold war)

If you are the Imperium of man
Is it Xeno or Chaos? Yes? Clearly war.

Lots of people seem to be confusing Sciences with Vocational subjects.

Also, confusing Liberal Arts with "Non Science".

The subjects pointed to as being "more useful" are the vocational subjects. In sciences,maths or particle physics, whilst important, are in and of themselves, at undergraduate level, no more useful than, say, English or Fine Art.

Vocational humanities subjects like Law or Design are just as useful as engineering.

If we have to accept and respect "real" Vampires...can I identify as a "real" Vampire Hunter? I demand the right to hunt and stake Vampires, dammit.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
If we have to accept and respect "real" Vampires...can I identify as a "real" Vampire Hunter? I demand the right to hunt and stake Vampires, dammit.

You can, but I think you need a permit;

white_wolf wrote:


Variables for war?
Military Strength

Depends on whether the war would be percieved as just or not, whether people would dodge drafts due to internal conflicts etc. That's liberal arts.

white_wolf wrote:

-Training

Depends on tradition and history, the study of which are liberal arts.

white_wolf wrote:

-Gear

See above.

white_wolf wrote:

-Logistics

Again, dependant on conditions such as internal dissent, makeup of ethnic groups, history of the area etc. Liberal arts.

white_wolf wrote:

Time to build and switch over to a war time Economy

Depends on the willingness of the populace to switch to a war-time economy and on the effective management of the workforce, which is liberal arts.

white_wolf wrote:

Threat of nuclear retaliation

Psychology, which is a liberal art.

white_wolf wrote:

Office of defence Warfare

Not even sure what you mean here, but then again communication and linguistics is a liberal art.

white_wolf wrote:

Troop and equipment replacement.

Social anthropology. Liberal art.

white_wolf wrote:

Air superiority

Social anthropology and psychology will help your pilots keep fighting for longer. That's a liberal art.

white_wolf wrote:

Are they a threat?
-Have the made aggressive moods or attacked allies?
-could they possibly surpass us if we did nothing.
should we begin to invest in better military technology (could turn into a Cold war)

Psychology, history, social anthropology. Liberal arts.

In summary, you're so wrong that it's hard to measure accurately. Perhaps we ought to get some more STEM-field students so we can accurately map how wrong you are?

The Challenger explosion is interesting, because while the O-ring was, indeed, defective, that didn't cause the explosion. What caused the explosion was poor communication, a lack of ethics among the management team, and lack of accountability. In other words, all stuff that a good liberal arts education should provide.

 Polonius wrote:
The Challenger explosion is interesting, because while the O-ring was, indeed, defective, that didn't cause the explosion. What caused the explosion was poor communication, a lack of ethics among the management team, and lack of accountability. In other words, all stuff that a good liberal arts education should provide.

Yeah...The Challenger explosion was used several times as an example in my business classes as what happens with bad management. Had nothing to do with bad math.

On a technical note, the Challenger didn't explode, it broke apart mid-flight.

But yeah, NASA management was aware that the O-rings were a potential issue as far back as 1977 but it was deemed an "acceptable flight risk." They also disregarded warnings from engineers about launching that morning because of the unusually low temperatures at the launch pad. Even the contractor that made the O-rings brought up their concerns at a pre-flight meeting the night before the launch, but they were largely ignored (mainly because no safety officials were present at the meeting). The failure of the O-rings and the structural failure of the external fuel tank were solely the responsibility of the culture of NASA and the management structure at the time.

 Polonius wrote:
The Challenger explosion is interesting, because while the O-ring was, indeed, defective, that didn't cause the explosion. What caused the explosion was poor communication, a lack of ethics among the management team, and lack of accountability. In other words, all stuff that a good liberal arts education should provide.

I watched a documentary featuring an engineer who kept telling his superiors not to launch, but was ignored. He said the day of the launch, he couldn't watch it, figuring the Shuttle was just going to explode on the launch pad, so he was sitting in the cafeteria where he wouldn't see it. He went on to say he heard cheers as the Shuttle launched and thought he had been wrong, so he walked into the main area just in time to see the explosion.
After he went public with his story, he was subject to persecution from co workers and management and was run off the road twice by people he knew.

Wow...the people involved should have been jailed.

I'll tell you when it happened, when they took lawn darts off the market and put child proof caps on bleach.
We needed to weed out the gen-y gene pool a little more I can tell ya.

I dunno there will always be extreme idiots on any side. I hate what the over-sensitive generation will bring. I realize my dad is offensive and stuff but I can't help but wonder if this is the exact same crap that was pulled on him. People slowly considering words and things he did offensive until it became accepted that it was making younger generations see people like him as offensive.

I feel like people are getting to the point where if they don't think everybody is 100% equal at everything then they freak out (job pay being equal regardless of job, genders being 50/50 represented at all jobs regardless of skill or desire to do those jobs and in a sense only worrying about problems from minorities and women whereas white men or just white people are just ignored even though they make up a large portion of our population). I mean seriously whatever happened to having a job due to merit?

I mean whether people want to believe it or not people aren't 100% equal at everything. In matters of science and math I can't have my opinion in those fields considered equal to that of Einstein. That would be insulting to Einstein. He worked too hard to be good at what he does and was just normally good at it for some person like me with nowhere near the experience, effort or anything like that to take away from him.

@HBMC: You know the sad part man? The sad part is in the end the political left always wins in the long run or at least in my country. Seriously for the most part most big politically left issues have won. Unless there's a change of pace for all our countries this will probably become a reality. As right wing as the usa is considered in 100 years I probably wouldn't be surprised if every country (including the USA) made bestiality legal (something that to my knowledge is legal in Denmark and Netherlands). You might laugh at the idea but nothing ever happens all at once but slowly over time. Not that I have issue with people that are gay or black but a hundred years ago people took more issue to them. Who even knows? Maybe pedophilia would be legal in 100 years. I sure hope not though.

Both those countries have laws against bestiality. In Denmarks case it was due to people visiting their country to abuse the fact it wasn't outlawed.

No laws against it in Hawaii, Kentucky, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey (pending bill to outlaw), New Mexico, Ohio, Texas, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Both those countries have laws against bestiality. In Denmarks case it was due to people visiting their country to abuse the fact it wasn't outlawed.

Just saying what my Danish friend told me. He said as long as the animal 'consented' then it was legal.

I don't really think it's an age problem. I'm the same age as most of these students, and even though I strongly believe in equality for all, I'm not offended by anything. It's quite the opposite in fact, I got a pretty offensive sense of humor.

I don't know, maybe some get more emotional than others about the same issues.


EDIT :

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Both those countries have laws against bestiality. In Denmarks case it was due to people visiting their country to abuse the fact it wasn't outlawed.

Just saying what my Danish friend told me. He said as long as the animal 'consented' then it was legal.

Wait what ?!

His friend is full of gak, mis-remembering as the law changed last year, or he himself is lying to cover his mistake. It happens.

http://satwcomic.com/brightest-sheep-in-the-field

Well maybe he just didn't know about the law change. I wouldn't know.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
@HBMC: You know the sad part man? The sad part is in the end the political left always wins in the long run or at least in my country.

Because the Left Wing in the average 'Western' country dominates the media and educational systems. Every new generation is going to be more left wing than the last.

Maybe pedophilia would be legal in 100 years. I sure hope not though.

That was tried once, but it didn't succeed. There was a organisation a few decades ago in Britain called the Pedophile Information Exchange or something, that sought legalization. Some prominent British politicians like Harriet Harman actually had dealings with them in the context of civil rights etc.

Its more likely that it'll simply be redefined until the definition is so narrow that it becomes meaningless.

So, considering America has a load of states where it's fine and dandy, and the two countries you used as an example don't, does this change anything?

I doubt it, but I ask anyway.

Also, Finland apparently has no laws against bestiality.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Both those countries have laws against bestiality. In Denmarks case it was due to people visiting their country to abuse the fact it wasn't outlawed.

Just saying what my Danish friend told me. He said as long as the animal 'consented' then it was legal.

All I can picture is that episode of Lilyhammer where the sheep was raped. That being said, I don't imagine many people anywhere lining up to have a go at the livestock.

I personally don't see it as a matter that should change regardless of how many want it.

As we currently think it, animals can't consent. Therefore just by that it is wrong. Let alone all the other things people will put forward against it.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
So, considering America has a load of states where it's fine and dandy, and the two countries you used as an example don't, does this change anything?

I doubt it, but I ask anyway.

For what bestiality? Na to my knowledge it's straight up legal. Then again it would be totally American of me for a foreigner to tell me what's going on in my country and be right about it . I tend not to watch the news enough I admit. Then again I'd personally rather experience it or at least ask those who were there (if even possible).

 LethalShade wrote:
I don't really think it's an age problem. I'm the same age as most of these students, and even though I strongly believe in equality for all, I'm not offended by anything. It's quite the opposite in fact, I got a pretty offensive sense of humor.

I don't know, maybe some get more emotional than others about the same issues.

Thankfully you do have an offensive sense of humor. Personally I think people that talk of being offended are really just standing up for their own beliefs rather than caring about others. You ever notice how somebody that is selfish will never offer something but always demands something when they may have been wronged (without even knowing). Yeah I think it's the same here. They basically don't care when they wrong but if they are even slightly possibly wronged they call foul. That said it's always worth it to take note of the person's personality. See how they react to somebody using their stuff and similar. It's probably a good way to find out. Often note how frequently they seem selfish and you'll probably find out the truth there.