Good god I can't get going on this final

[Abagadro]

I've revived my tradition (which I started my first semester of undergrad and did all the way through law school) of finding the best cigar I can get my hands on and smoking it to mark the end of a semester. This time it was a Padron 1964 Anniversary (these freaking things have individual serial numbers for christ's sake).  Amazing smoke. I coupled it with some Warre's 10 year tawny port. Mmmmmmm.

[Johny Cee]

I think one thing you need to keep in mind is that alot of MBA programs are basically a glorified catchup on things you didn't learn as an undergrad.  They spurt out a huge amount of general knowledge about finance, accounting, economics, etc etc because half the people getting their MBA skipped this while getting their bachelors in literature, or whatever.

Had a few conversations with folks getting a less focused MBA.  From my end, have a bachelors in economics (developmental, mostly) and almost a bachelors in accounting (and am a public accountant dragging my feet on failing the CPA the first time).

Book learning vs practical....  Honestly,  MOST folks are fucking clueless.  In my opinion, those with mostly practical background are worse.  Mostly because when I advise them on something,  I have to get through the arrogance of ignorance.

A frim grasp of theory is huge.  With only practical experience, most people have a tough time generalizing and avoiding mistakes the first time through.  Always one step behind, since these people oftentimes can only learn from mistakes and not seek to avoid situations that would cause mistakes in the first place.  

Public accounting can be quite a bit of fun, though.  On any given day,  I bounce around between tax planning, management consulting, public/non-profit advisement or auditing,  or any one of a dozen other things.  You haven't lived till you've hectored people (related to an audit) at four different levels of government bureaucracy.

Especially once you've mastered the appropriate facial expressions and non-committal noises to generate a certain amount of unease....

[Johny Cee]

What do you guys do for a living?

Do you know what finance/accounting people do in their jobs?

Which majors are worthy of respect?

Anyone who goes in for either finance or accounting is a different breed of cat from the generic "business major".  My worst moments going back to school for accounting were the low-level courses, because they were cluttered with the walking dead of the fucking business major department.  Once you get past the 300 level courses you don't run into much anymore..... thank god.

Anyone that can handle either the math or the mental gymnastics of some of the advanced accounting deserves better.  Gah!  Pension fund accounting.....

Marketing is basically dumbed down microeconomics,  full of practical examples, because you don't think most of the folks in can get past the theory.

[HaemishM]

A business major is just about as useless as an art major, except in art majors, you actually have to produce something out of all that theory.

Marketing majors... /shiver. I think only Marketing beats out business philosophy for being full of shit. But then, the whole art of marketing is bullshitting well enough that even though your target KNOWS your bullshitting them, they knock down your door for your product anyway.

[Pococurante]

Book learning vs practical....  Honestly,  MOST folks are fucking clueless.  In my opinion, those with mostly practical background are worse.  Mostly because when I advise them on something,  I have to get through the arrogance of ignorance.

When all they have is "practical experience" in a small pond I'd definitely agree with you.  One has to have a good feel for the "rules" before you can break the mold.  True that bulldogged tenacity can keep with up with genuine brilliance but one costs a whole helluva lot less and inflicts less wear and tear on the people around them.  People without theory are people all too likely to reinvent square wheels.

[Viin]

When all they have is "practical experience" in a small pond I'd definitely agree with you. One has to have a good feel for the "rules" before you can break the mold. True that bulldogged tenacity can keep with up with genuine brilliance but one costs a whole helluva lot less and inflicts less wear and tear on the people around them. People without theory are people all too likely to reinvent square wheels.

That's true, though it does depend on what level they are at. I think at certain levels practical experience is needed much more then theory (worker-bees, ie: sys admins, most programmers, etc) because theory doesn't make things happen. Higher levels of design, network arcitecture, etc do require some theory to understand how everything fits together and to be able to take on more complex assignments. Certain levels of programming require this as well.

That said, I'd much rather hire someone who has practical experience in the field they are being hired for than someone who just read a lot of books on the subject. You can teach theory and design practices, you can't teach expirence and know-how.

Note: if you can't tell, most of my dealings are in IT, so this may not apply as much to other fields (especially non-technical) fields. :)

[Strazos]

I'm a History major, I was a Bio/Pre-Med before swapping to history.

Yes, I would like to mak emoney too, but I don't go to school with the express purpose of "getting rich".

And most of the business people I have met, I am guessing, are Marketing, PR/Advertising, or Management types. From what I have seen of their "work", it just seems like man-made bullshit to me.

Crunching numbers as an Accountant, or Financial planning....that stuff takes a lot of real work and effort.

But appealing to the lowest common denominator and stepping on people to raise yourself up? That takes douchebaggery, not talent.

[Toast]

Those kids who are in business majors that are not finance or accounting are in for some hurt when job interview season comes around.

When I was in that process at the UT business school, the vast majority of job postings insisted on finance or accounting majors (i.e. quantitative skills required). Marketing students were pretty much pigeon-holed into sales roles.

All that being said, it would probably be smart if business schools had a major that was simply "Microsoft Excel" because that's what most of us do all the time in the real world anyway.

[Paelos]

That's actually true about Excel. It's probably the only thing I know really well at my job, and I'm seen as the smart guy.

[Ezdaar]

This is a bit of a derail but in the general spirit of where the discussion is going.

I'm of the opinion that short of having a degree in mathematics or physics the best prepared thinkers coming out of colleges are in the liberal arts, preferably philosophy. It absolutely amazes me the number of science and engineering students I run into that don't understand the basic principles of logic or even scientific method. I fear that we've become Brazil in the 50s as described in "Surely you're joking Mr. Feyman?". Science does not consist of memorizing facts and being able to spit them back out on command.

Please for the love of god make it a requirement that all science and engineering students take some philosophy of science classes.

[Pococurante]

Please for the love of god make it a requirement that all science and engineering students take some philosophy of science classes.

Damn straight.  I've always been a liberal arts kind of guy but when the first child support check came due I hit the books and became hard-core technical in no time.

But also after years of observation I've also come to the conclusion that some folks really are not emotionally capable of circumspect thought until very late in life - that's cool since folks with complete dedication/focus are incredibly valuable.  Just don't let them get even to middle management.

"The world needs ditchdiggers too."
-- Judge Schmales, Caddyshack

[Jayce]

I fear that we've become Brazil in the 50s as described in "Surely you're joking Mr. Feyman?". Science does not consist of memorizing facts and being able to spit them back out on command.

Please for the love of god make it a requirement that all science and engineering students take some philosophy of science classes.

Awesome book.  Awesome man.  And yeah, I can see the parallel now that you mention it where I didn't before.

Sadly, what you're talking about -- making students take courses that seem like fluff or don't have immediate application to their field of study -- is pretty reviled these days.  The people who think that college is a vocational school and that you shouldn't learn anything without direct application ("now what will I ever use this for?") have made inroads.

[HaemishM]

It couldn't be because of a political climate in this country which speaks of "academic types" with revulsion and derision, could it?  :-D

My biggest problem with liberal arts educations is that most don't go far enough. Most will make you take a bunch of fluff, but then the fluff classes don't teach you any actual application of what you are learning. For instance, as an art major, I HAD to take College Algebra. But none of that class was used for practical applications of algebra, saving all the practical parts for those who were actually majoring in something like engineering or a science that needed math. I mean, simple shit like calculating the square footage of an area is glossed over for theoretical shit that's supposed to prepare someone for calculus. Biology was just as bad. Not to mention that attending a private, Presbyterian college, some of the students had to hear shit from the Biology professors like, 'AIDS is God's curse upon sinners.' Fucking tools.

[Margalis]

Applied math is crap. I would (and did) avoid all applied math like the plague other than stuff I was specifically interested in. Then again, this is coming from someone who took "Introduction to N-Dimensional Polytopes", so make of my opinion what you will.

IMO, applied math helps you become good at specific things, and theoretical math makes you a better problem solver in general. It's like computer science, programming courses don't make you better at anything but programming, and theory courses don't make you a better programmer. They make you a better problem solver, but they aren't going to help you with dangling pointers.

[HaemishM]

Application without theory is just as useless as theory without application. If all you do is specific problems, that's all you are good for, unless you are taught the thinking behind that.

There's precious little merging of those types of thinking done in colleges these days.

[Strazos]

Sadly, what you're talking about -- making students take courses that seem like fluff or don't have immediate application to their field of study -- is pretty reviled these days.  The people who think that college is a vocational school and that you shouldn't learn anything without direct application ("now what will I ever use this for?") have made inroads.

Application without theory is just as useless as theory without application. If all you do is specific problems, that's all you are good for, unless you are taught the thinking behind that.

There's precious little merging of those types of thinking done in colleges these days.

Great and Great. At least my at school,  the administration seems to be trying to get back to this kind of thing. I guess they were too busy forming a highly-ranked College of Engineering with (last I heard) 100% employment upon graduation in under 10 years, and improving that god forsaken College of Business. They cater to the College of Ed kids a lot too, but I suppose that's forgivable.

But at least, as a History major, I feel I have recieved plenty of both Theory and Application. Then again, by the time I graduate, as far as all of my history courses go, save 3 class, I will have taken only 3 different professors.

I'm picky.

PS: Fucking hell, do you think I could sue my 8th grade Algebra teacher, or the school district, for FUCKING UP my mathematical foundation? Before this time I was great in math; I only got into the course in 8th grade because I passed a certain honors exam. Then, I get in, and the teacher basically refused to teach me shit that I didn't understand (which was frequently). After ending up with something like a B- for the year, the district Refused to let me repeat it in high school.

High level math (Calculus) is hard without a good understanding of Algebra. Being a Mechanical Engineer is hard without a good understanding of Calculus. I would have killed to be able to become an Automotive Engineer and design American or European sportscars.  Vroom-motherfucking-Vroom

[Murgos]

Go take pre-calc and do it then.  Calculus isn't that hard, it's mostly just memorization and technique.  Once you have the basic formulas memorized you can do pretty much anything with integration by parts.

Differential Eqns are only difficult in the problem set up and the amount of time it takes to complete them.  The actual individuals steps require little more than a moderate sense of pattern recognition.  Linear Algebra is easy, the lower levels of Abstract math that I'm familiar with are even more pattern recognition and memorization.

I didn't start college until I was 24 and I had to start over with trig and pre-calc and now I have a minor in math.  To complain that your 8th grade algebra class is holding you back from what you really want to do is a serious cop-out.

[Strazos]

Um, no, it's not. Try doing Geometry and Pre-Calc with a shitty understanding of Algebra. I did, and it sucked. All math is pretty hard when you're not a memorization monkey, like me. Oh yeah, honors physics in high school was fun too, when not only could I not remember the damn formulas, but also sucked at the math...which is a shame, because I always aced the theory portions of the examines.

I've actually had to take Calculus twice in college; the first time because I was Pre-Med at the time and it was required, the second time to override the grade I got the first time when I bombed it. I ended up getting a B in Calculus I, but that was more due to circumstances and luck than skill. Even with that B, I only uderstood, roughly, about 55% of the material, and that's with the great professor I took the second time. I distinctly remember loving explicit differentiation, but getting my ass handed to me whenever we did "Implicit" anything.

Being a Mechanical Engineer and developing high-end engines is more of a recent fantasy than a long-time dream or goal. Still, it's pretty shitty that I was not allowed to try and really learn Algebra. It's not really something I could teach myself.

[HaemishM]

It is also proven that as your brain learns as a child/young adult, it develops neural pathways based on what and how you learn. It's a muscle, so it exercises the thought processes you do use and the ones you don't or can't, they don't develop as well. That makes learning those type of things harder as an adult, because it's like doing a physical exercise on a set of muscles you've never used. It hurts.

It can be overcome, but most never will, because their brains literally aren't built for it.

[Ezdaar]

As someone who is getting paid to do mathematics I have to disagree with the idea that it is all memorization or any significant part memorization for that matter. Most mathematicians I know are terrible at memorizing things and at some point you realize if you have the problem solving skills you can just work things out rather than memorize them. Of course, having said that, the way they teach most things up to and including calculus is just by wrote memorization. It's a shame that most people never get to experience actual mathematics.

Margalis:

There is this idea in a lot of places that applied math is crap but I think it depends on your idea of applied. If you mean numerical analysis or something like that I agree. However I consider applied things to be like representation theory or, my area of study, combinatorics. Both have a ton of applications and combinatorics tends to be right alongside computer science in many areas, but I would claim that they're just as interesting and as difficult as any analysis or other algebra(okay maybe not algebraic geometry but that lives in its own world) you can toss out.

[Margalis]

Margalis:

There is this idea in a lot of places that applied math is crap but I think it depends on your idea of applied. If you mean numerical analysis or something like that I agree. However I consider applied things to be like representation theory or, my area of study, combinatorics. Both have a ton of applications and combinatorics tends to be right alongside computer science in many areas, but I would claim that they're just as interesting and as difficult as any analysis or other algebra(okay maybe not algebraic geometry but that lives in its own world) you can toss out.

Yeah, I meant numerical analysis mostly. Applied math is not the same as math that has applications, I guess I was speaking more of engineering-style math. Things that involve calculators, approximation methods and the like. There are wacky things like hyperbolic geometry that have quite a bit to do with crypto, but I wouldn't call hyperbolic geometry applied math. (You can do some interesting things involving key space analysis and such in geometry)

[MrHat]

Margalis:

There is this idea in a lot of places that applied math is crap but I think it depends on your idea of applied. If you mean numerical analysis or something like that I agree. However I consider applied things to be like representation theory or, my area of study, combinatorics. Both have a ton of applications and combinatorics tends to be right alongside computer science in many areas, but I would claim that they're just as interesting and as difficult as any analysis or other algebra(okay maybe not algebraic geometry but that lives in its own world) you can toss out.

Yeah, I meant numerical analysis mostly. Applied math is not the same as math that has applications, I guess I was speaking more of engineering-style math. Things that involve calculators, approximation methods and the like. There are wacky things like hyperbolic geometry that have quite a bit to do with crypto, but I wouldn't call hyperbolic geometry applied math. (You can do some interesting things involving key space analysis and such in geometry)

Only thing Engineering Math involves is a crib sheet full of equations and MatLab.