No Money in Law !? (2 Viewers)

[Justina]

I think degrees in Law and science/maths are equally useful - just useful for different things.
Whether something is 'intellectually challenging' is highly subjective.

Anyway...we're really veering off topic. I'm currently studying a commerce degree and plan to study a JD after it. I don't intend to work as a lawyer, but I still think it would be a good degree to have. A law degree compliments a number of business positions. I've also spoken to people in the field who have told me that there is a greater chance of promotion to managerial positions if you have knowledge/expertise in a number of areas, particularly law.

 

[ajdlinux]

You would be surprised how many CEO's and people in government have degrees in engineering/maths/science.

And by the term 'a real degree', I mean an intellectually challenging degree.

I would be rather careful classifying law as something that's not intellectually challenging...

 

[tommykins]

I would be rather careful classifying law as something that's not intellectually challenging...

hai guyz i can readz

 

[shuttle_bus5]

hai guyz i can readz

i can sumtimez write wordz 2

 

[TacoTerrorist]

^ Uhh, lol? Firstly, the difficulty of subjects is entirely subjective. Maths and science are generally regarded to be more challenging, but this hardly means that people who do these subjects are intellectually superior to those who do Arts etc. In my experience, it is more difficult to get a very high mark in a subject like English than it is in mathematics, assuming the competency of all students is equal. That is, someone who is very good at English will find it harder to get a HD or an A+ than someone who is conversely very good at maths. This is because marking for English can be very subjective, as opposed to maths or science where you're either right or wrong.

At university level, a high mark in a subject like History is actually quite difficult, considering the need for a very well researched and argued essay, and a deep, complex understanding of the subject matter. Furthermore, some people are just not interested in maths or science. In any case, I find those who are good at maths or science and shit in English to be very generic, boring people. I also find it amusing that some people who condemn English as being 'not a real subject' can hardly string together a coherent sentence or know the difference between 'their, 'there', 'they're' etc.

 

[tommykins]

ye well i hd'd my arts gsubject and got 26/30 for my essay wot NAOW!!?@?!

 

[ekoolish]

Law has no monies, join z rat race n listen to your parents, do medicine or engineering

 

[shuttle_bus5]

guyz i am an engineer. so liek me can't write words or spell =[
wot do i do?

 

[BOSnewbie]

Law has no monies, join z rat race n listen to your parents, do medicine or engineering

The money in Law may not be that great, but the money in Med isn't that great either in the first few years of employment.

 

[bio_nut]

^ Uhh, lol? Firstly, the difficulty of subjects is entirely subjective. Maths and science are generally regarded to be more challenging, but this hardly means that people who do these subjects are intellectually superior to those who do Arts etc. In my experience, it is more difficult to get a very high mark in a subject like English than it is in mathematics, assuming the competency of all students is equal. That is, someone who is very good at English will find it harder to get a HD or an A+ than someone who is conversely very good at maths. This is because marking for English can be very subjective, as opposed to maths or science where you're either right or wrong.

At university level, a high mark in a subject like History is actually quite difficult, considering the need for a very well researched and argued essay, and a deep, complex understanding of the subject matter. Furthermore, some people are just not interested in maths or science. In any case, I find those who are good at maths or science and shit in English to be very generic, boring people. I also find it amusing that some people who condemn English as being 'not a real subject' can hardly string together a coherent sentence or know the difference between 'their, 'there', 'they're' etc.

You obviously know nothing about science at a university level, you're just as bad as those you claim don't understand the humanities in a similar context.

Science at uni is not just about writing an answer and it being right or wrong. I had to write a scientific essay this year, for god's sake. It's about exploring problems based on what we know, and offering up better solutions and alternatives if possible.

Like tommy I have done arts subjects while at uni and gone very, very well. Your argument shows extreme lack of knowledge in the area.

 

[withoutaface]

^ Uhh, lol? Firstly, the difficulty of subjects is entirely subjective. Maths and science are generally regarded to be more challenging, but this hardly means that people who do these subjects are intellectually superior to those who do Arts etc. In my experience, it is more difficult to get a very high mark in a subject like English than it is in mathematics, assuming the competency of all students is equal. That is, someone who is very good at English will find it harder to get a HD or an A+ than someone who is conversely very good at maths. This is because marking for English can be very subjective, as opposed to maths or science where you're either right or wrong.

At university level, a high mark in a subject like History is actually quite difficult, considering the need for a very well researched and argued essay, and a deep, complex understanding of the subject matter. Furthermore, some people are just not interested in maths or science. In any case, I find those who are good at maths or science and shit in English to be very generic, boring people. I also find it amusing that some people who condemn English as being 'not a real subject' can hardly string together a coherent sentence or know the difference between 'their, 'there', 'they're' etc.

Can hardly string a coherent sentence together. Eschew obfuscation, Yoda.

 

[TacoTerrorist]

Can hardly string a coherent sentence together. Eschew obfuscation, Yoda.

It's a forum, I'm not exactly writing a research paper buddy.

You obviously know nothing about science at a university level, you're just as bad as those you claim don't understand the humanities in a similar context.

Science at uni is not just about writing an answer and it being right or wrong. I had to write a scientific essay this year, for god's sake. It's about exploring problems based on what we know, and offering up better solutions and alternatives if possible.

Like tommy I have done arts subjects while at uni and gone very, very well. Your argument shows extreme lack of knowledge in the area.

You caught me out, I don't know anything about university level science. However, I'm not as 'bad' as those who claim that the humanities are easy. In any case, my argument shows extreme lack of knowledge in the area of science, which is not entirely pertinent to the discussion. I just don't like it when people (not necessarily you) try and demean the academic qualities intristic in most humanities subjects.

Just because someone is good at English but crap at Maths does not mean they are less intelligent than someone the other way around. That is that I'm trying to get across.

 

[withoutaface]

You're not good at English, though. If it takes a 'research paper' level of concentration to construct your sentences properly, you're obviously deficient in that area.

 

[Existential]

You're not good at English, though. If it takes a 'research paper' level of concentration to construct your sentences properly, you're obviously deficient in that area.

CORRECTION:

English as an academic subject is all about constructing texts and responding to texts by formal methods. Note that we are not doing that here.

English literacy is different. It is valued in the study of English but by no means is someone's analytical and creative ability measured by their sentence structures in these forums.

 

[Existential]

You would be surprised how many CEO's and people in government have degrees in engineering/maths/science.

And by the term 'a real degree', I mean an intellectually challenging degree.

again, it is totally up for debate as to constitutes an 'intellectually challenging real degree'!

stop giving your opinion. if you throw in some factual information maybe people will take you more seriously.

 

[Existential]

Politicians dont run the country, bureaucrats do. All politicians have law degree's because they couldn't get a job in law.
Its the Economist/mathematics/scientist who run the country m8

there is more bs to that than there is truth.

 

[Existential]

not every law graduate choose to enter the law profession.
scientist dont run the country, because if they did, we will probably all be dead or experimented on. you can thank ethics and lawyers for that movement.
and think about whats really governing society, im pretty sure its the law.

I think degrees in Law and science/maths are equally useful - just useful for different things.
Whether something is 'intellectually challenging' is highly subjective.

Anyway...we're really veering off topic. I'm currently studying a commerce degree and plan to study a JD after it. I don't intend to work as a lawyer, but I still think it would be a good degree to have. A law degree compliments a number of business positions. I've also spoken to people in the field who have told me that there is a greater chance of promotion to managerial positions if you have knowledge/expertise in a number of areas, particularly law.

^ Uhh, lol? Firstly, the difficulty of subjects is entirely subjective. Maths and science are generally regarded to be more challenging, but this hardly means that people who do these subjects are intellectually superior to those who do Arts etc. In my experience, it is more difficult to get a very high mark in a subject like English than it is in mathematics, assuming the competency of all students is equal. That is, someone who is very good at English will find it harder to get a HD or an A+ than someone who is conversely very good at maths. This is because marking for English can be very subjective, as opposed to maths or science where you're either right or wrong.

At university level, a high mark in a subject like History is actually quite difficult, considering the need for a very well researched and argued essay, and a deep, complex understanding of the subject matter. Furthermore, some people are just not interested in maths or science. In any case, I find those who are good at maths or science and shit in English to be very generic, boring people. I also find it amusing that some people who condemn English as being 'not a real subject' can hardly string together a coherent sentence or know the difference between 'their, 'there', 'they're' etc.

+1 to all of the above

 

[Existential]

guyz i am an engineer. so liek me can't write words or spell =[
wot do i do?

go build something - that's all your good for.

 

[bio_nut]

go build something - that's all your good for.

Yeah, we soooo need people who can analyse poetry instead of develop our infrastructure.

Jeez.

 

[tommykins]

go build something - that's all your good for.

HAHAHAH

this is so hilarious, seriously.

if only you knew what science and engineering is all about hey