objective and subjective

I am just about to finish secondary school and I am pretty usless at subjective subjects (English, geography etc.) however, I'm pretty sharp on my objective subjects (Maths physics etc.). I'm pretty good at arguing too, but I have no common sense. Do you know other people like this? Do you class this sort of person as; clever, dumb, or just plain messed up?

Thoughts?

At 6/7/2012 7:02:10 PM, Erik_Boonprakong-Kitching wrote:
I am just about to finish secondary school and I am pretty usless at subjective subjects (English, geography etc.) however, I'm pretty sharp on my objective subjects (Maths physics etc.). I'm pretty good at arguing too, but I have no common sense. Do you know other people like this? Do you class this sort of person as; clever, dumb, or just plain messed up?

Thoughts?

I was better at my science and math classes in high school. It's good though, most of the high paying careers require you to know this stuff. Engineering majors, economics majors, finance majors, and physics majors are the top paying salaries. Of course If you want to be a doctor, that's also a big buck paying job.

While those at the bottom salary majors are english.

English just always seemed totally useless to me.

At 6/7/2012 7:08:57 PM, darkkermit wrote:

At 6/7/2012 7:02:10 PM, Erik_Boonprakong-Kitching wrote:
I am just about to finish secondary school and I am pretty usless at subjective subjects (English, geography etc.) however, I'm pretty sharp on my objective subjects (Maths physics etc.). I'm pretty good at arguing too, but I have no common sense. Do you know other people like this? Do you class this sort of person as; clever, dumb, or just plain messed up?

Thoughts?

I was better at my science and math classes in high school. It's good though, most of the high paying careers require you to know this stuff. Engineering majors, economics majors, finance majors, and physics majors are the top paying salaries. Of course If you want to be a doctor, that's also a big buck paying job.

While those at the bottom salary majors are english.

People dont appreciate english unless its in the form of a saga about wizards or vampires...

At 6/7/2012 7:02:10 PM, Erik_Boonprakong-Kitching wrote:
I am just about to finish secondary school and I am pretty usless at subjective subjects (English, geography etc.) however, I'm pretty sharp on my objective subjects (Maths physics etc.). I'm pretty good at arguing too, but I have no common sense. Do you know other people like this? Do you class this sort of person as; clever, dumb, or just plain messed up?

Thoughts?

when I actually applied myself my grads were perfect with the exception of math. I think that people often have more potential than is indicated by test results.

At 6/7/2012 7:02:10 PM, Erik_Boonprakong-Kitching wrote:
I am just about to finish secondary school and I am pretty usless at subjective subjects (English, geography etc.) however, I'm pretty sharp on my objective subjects (Maths physics etc.). I'm pretty good at arguing too, but I have no common sense. Do you know other people like this? Do you class this sort of person as; clever, dumb, or just plain messed up?

Thoughts?

I'd feel guilty if I made my main point without addressing your first two question marks, so yes, I do know people like that, and, if I'm forced to pick between the three, I'd classify them as the second, but not in the conventional sense of being stupid (or unable to speak, if that's what comes to mind).

Most people divide their subjects into the following categories:

Subjective ("Right Brain"):
English (Any language, really)
History
Geography
Arts

Objective ("Left Brain"):
Sciences
Math

I think I've exhausted all the compulsory courses; correct me if I'm wrong.

Regardless, I found at some point in middle school that most people like to say that they're good at one, but not the other; that is, they are either a "left brain thinker" or a "right brain thinker." I don't want to come across as if I'm trying to diminish the truth in the statement that most people are typically better at one than the other, but I don't believe the difference is so dramatic as people want it to be. When I was in middle school (so two years ago), I was heavily involved in the idea of metacognition; throughout that time, I began to find that the subjective, "soft," left brain subjects really involved much more right brain thinking than I had originally thought. The same holds true for the objective, "hard," right brain subjects. Let me give some examples:

When a musician composes a piece, even if they're improvising, they are still pulling from their own pre-existing knowledge of music; they aren't making up notes, and they're not making up new dynamics. What they are doing, however, is arranging the notes, dynamics, and tempi into new phrases, expressions, and ideas. They also know that these phrases, expressions, and ideas have to make sense in a musical context; they know they can't resolve a phrase to a "G" note if they're in the key of F# (usually). There are many "rules" that they know they have to follow, unless they want some experimental, "avant garde" noise. In this way, they're formulating their ideas in a remarkably right brain manner.

Similarly, you would be hard-pressed to find a scientist who points at any particular theory or law and says "this is, invariably, the case; there is no room to question it, and it can never be wrong." (This is why it's called science and not dogma). On the contrary, science is founded upon the desire to prove itself wrong, or, at the least, question itself. The same holds true (maybe to a lesser extent) with mathematics.

When I'm writing this, I'm not just writing whatever comes to mind (this might be a bit of a lie; I didn't sit and formulate it for an hour beforehand, but the example still has some gravity, I hope); I'm thinking it through in accordance with what I know to work so it is (at least somewhat) coherent. I write an essay the same way I would compose a piece of music, or do algebra; with an equal amount of left and right brain thinking.

From my experience, which might not be as effective for everyone, "subjective" subjects require a respectable amount of objectivity, and "objective" subjects require the same amount of subjectivity, and I thinking grouping them off in any other manner is puerile and ridiculous. I've gone on to do pretty well in just about every subject, so it hasn't let me down yet.