College is viewed as a necessity, yet priced as a luxury.
1. Fine Arts
(Ed: Your primary tumblrs majored in two of these and now work in the field of a third.)
I combined the uselessness of #2 + #9 into something practical.
Raise your hand if you disagree. Money alone doesn’t define the usefulness of these majors, nor should it. And 93 percent of statistics don’t always apply to you.
Woohoo #7 & #4!!!
I’m not entirely clear how Architecture, Graphic Design, and Film and Video Arts can be useless. Perhaps over-saturated, but yeah, #7 and #4 are tops in my book, too. I also once majored in #13, love #11, can do #8, and am intrigued by nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, and 12 (and maybe even #1).
Yes, indeed, I am completely useless.
And yes, Mr. Anal-Retentive Perfectionist with Asperger Tendencies did go back to SFB and Newsweek’s original posts to copy and paste this reblog together in its curent form. You’re welcome.
Many adults are put off when youngsters pose scientific questions. Children ask why the sun is yellow, or what a dream is, or how deep you can dig a hole, or when is the world’s birthday, or why we have toes. Too many teachers and parents answer with irritation or ridicule, or quickly move on to something else. Why adults should pretend to omniscience before a five-year-old, I can’t for the life of me understand. What’s wrong with admitting that you don’t know? Children soon recognize that somehow this kind of question annoys many adults. A few more experiences like this, and another child has been lost to science.
There are many better responses. If we have an idea of the answer, we could try to explain. If we don’t, we could go to the encyclopedia or the library. Or we might say to the child: “I don’t know the answer. Maybe no one knows. Maybe when you grow up, you’ll be the first to find out.”
“The reason why science and religion are actually incompatible is that, in the real world, they reach incompatible conclusions. It’s worth noting that this incompatibility is perfectly evident to any fair-minded person who cares to look. Different religions make very different claims, but they typically end up saying things like “God made the universe in six days” or “Jesus died and was resurrected” or “Moses parted the red sea” or “dead souls are reincarnated in accordance with their karmic burden.” And science says: none of that is true. So there you go, incompatibility.” — Sean Carroll
The reason why this argument is refutable is because Sean Carroll is a complete blowhard. Looking at myth used to explain the unexplainable to the simple does not prove your point. Claiming that billions of people throughout history are completely and irrefutably wrong with no real relation to your argument does not help your argument.
It should be perfectly clear to any non-dogmatic, truly open-minded individual who recognizes what seems obvious to many — that there is a body (physical) and there is a soul (spiritual) — that religion is concerned with the soul while science is concerned with the body.
Religion and faith are concerned with the unseen and unseeable. Science is concerned with what it can see and classify. To stretch either into the other realm in a way to eradicate the other is irresponsible and ignorant.
And yes, religion does concern itself with some aspects of the body and what is seen, obviously (how to live and what to do). Just as science does concern itself with some aspects of what would be considered the spirit, the unseen. (Psychology?) They are not in any way, though, mutually exclusive.