DSS' Berg Interprets Opinion Based Degrees as Mentally Challenging over Practical Degrees

[quote]Originally posted by berg

You see, I don't know where you went to college, and I can't be bothered to investigate that. But, I can tell you that if you went to a good school, or three of them as I did, you would understand why Advertising and Business are considered soft degrees. That is just a fact, you can't argue with that, they are soft degrees. So, in a nutshell, that is why I call them pussy degrees. There is nothing mentally challenging about a Business or Advertising degree. An MBA, sure, that is a challenge.[/quote]

Don't mistake your opinion, as to what makes a hard degree or a soft one, as that one that resulted from having gone to a "good" school.

I don't recall using "soft" or "hard" to describe degrees when I started out. We had multiple categories to describe the different degrees. We didn't use "soft" or "hard" to describe them.

We used terms like "black and white" and "grey." The "black and white" were the hard sciences... your engineering, mathematics and science degrees. Business, teaching, hospitality, etc, were in a class of their own.

Then we had the grey classes... which described political science, philosophy, and other courses that hinged heavily on opinion. We also had "liberal arts," which encompassed a combination of academic disciplines.

We also used the terms "useful," and "useless." Useful resulted in a measurable skill that you could apply in the real world. This incorporated black and white courses, as well as courses that built into a regular profession... like business, journalism, and teaching.

We also staggered them as follows: Math, Science, Engineering, etc, at the top; Business, journalism, etc in the middle; and the grey courses at the bottom.

Based on your comments, about the above degrees, I doubt that you attempted to complete a Business, or Advertising course... unless it was an introductory course. If that was your only exposure, then you're still not qualified to judge those degrees.

You argue that "challenging the mind" should be a criteria.

That arrogantly assumes that those that didn't follow your path didn't challenge their minds. That also arrogantly assumes that those that didn't go to a university failed to "challenge their minds." You don't need a university experience to challenge your mind. People could still do intellectually challenging activities without matriculating into a university, or enrolling in a course.

If an academic discipline challenged you, but not someone else, that's not a reflection of the university they went to. That's a reflection of where each person's interests fall. It's also a reflection of aptitude for a certain subject.

Subjects that cause people to have to work their brains may not require any brain power from another person.