Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!sri-unix!hplabs!decwrl!pyramid!oliveb!intelca!mipos3!martin
From: martin@mipos3.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.misc
Subject: Re: the trouble with universities
Message-ID: <496@mipos3.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Feb-87 20:59:20 EST
Article-I.D.: mipos3.496
Posted: Thu Feb 26 20:59:20 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Mar-87 10:36:56 EST
References: <254@uhmanoa.UUCP> <73600005@uiucdcsp> <1411@navajo.STANFORD.EDU>
Reply-To: martin@mipos3.UUCP (Martin Harriman)
Organization: Intel, Santa Clara, CA
Lines: 15

In my experience, the split between humanities and science/engineering majors
works both ways.  The requirements are usually equally onerous (or equally
undemanding) both ways.  Both classes of people tend to cherry-pick their
"unfavorite" fields for easy courses--and both tend to complain that they
have to take "real" courses in these other fields, while those other guys
get away with taking the basket-weaving-equivalency specials.  You may think
you had to take "real" humanities courses; I'll lay two to one you took the
introductory survey courses the real humanities majors do their best to
petition/place out of.  You've already seen that most humanities types
go for things like "Astronomy 1:  Like, You Know, The Universe, No Math
Required."

Personally, I rather enjoy taking "real" science courses for recreation--
they're so easy compared with the humanities...
  --Martin Harriman, sometime major in Literature (Classics, Greek and Latin)