Off My Chest
RULES:
I am looking for mods!
1. The "good" part of our community means we are pro-empathy and anti-harassment. However, we don't intend to make this a "safe space" where everyone has to be a saint. Sh*t happens, and life is messy. That's why we get things off our chests.
2. Bigotry is not allowed. That includes racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, and religiophobia. (If you want to vent about religion, that's fine; but religion is not inherently evil.)
3. Frustrated, venting, or angry posts are still welcome.
4. Posts and comments that bait, threaten, or incite harassment are not allowed.
5. If anyone offers mental, medical, or professional advice here, please remember to take it with a grain of salt. Seek out real professionals if needed.
6. Please put NSFW behind NSFW tags.
view the rest of the comments
I argue young people actually wanting to learn stuff that they don't need in work/daily life has always been the exception, historically. How many people are truly intrinsically interested in cellular biology/biochemistry, nuclear physics, and calculus? If they don't directly need it for their jobs.
When I was in highschool, I came up with an expression: "Scratch an artist and you'll find a student of many subjects underneath." To some extent I agree with you, but I think it's more that kids aren't really introduced to a variety of subjects in an interesting way. Art causes you to learn at least a surface level understanding of the science behind color theory and lighting, anatomy, engineering, and a host of other things just by the nature of needing it to get better at creating what you see in your head. Our understanding of anatomy today is founded upon the studies Da Vinci and his apprentices did of bodies that they stole from graveyards and performed autopsies on in secret.
Kids are naturally curious. They know nothing of the world around them and that curiosity and desire to learn is how we get stereotypes like the kid who never stops asking questions.
It's just that the way subjects are often taught is not conducive to engaging with that curiosity (ignoring when that curiosity is stifled by other influences like parental beliefs). Plenty of schools played with Kerbal Space Program, which has a simplified but still fairly realistic depiction of orbital mechanics in it, and that abstracted system taught many kids the basics of orbital mechanics and the science behind building rockets. Minecraft has taught many kids the basics of circuitry, as redstone is literally just basic circuit wiring - to the point where somebody created a full computer running DOS in Minecraft with a working keyboard and screen and everything.
I think it's an issue of approachability vs one of outright not caring. Tomes about the math behind nuclear physics has nothing on telling a kid that today you'll be telling them about the Demon Core or how basically all forms of generating power boil down to new and exciting ways to boil water. When you include the particle physics involved, they'll be much more interested in how that relates to why one guy in the room died while everybody else was perfectly okay than just an abstract on the deflection of radiation by atoms.
You had me until calculus. Give me stats any day, just not calculus.
sry for the really bad edit ;-)
Also it should say "I don't like calculus" in the first line, i just forgot to edit it.
holy shit I'd take the exact opposite. Stats is hella confusing, at least calc made sense
Calculus isn't bad until certain parts. Series and sequences can kiss my ass.
I went to school for cellular biology with every intention to be a stay at home mom. Cellular biology is just interesting and fun. Chemistry is interesting but I never would have taken it if it weren't a requirement.