Rutherford also remarked that “it [the splitting of the lithium atom] was a very poor and inefficient way of producing energy, and anyone who looked for a source of power in the transformation of the atoms was talking moonshine.” Perhaps it is as well that he stuck to physics, or he might have opined that the unique Swedish stamp currently valued at over two million dollars was “a very yellow kind of thing, almost worthless.”

I rarely use the phrase either, as there isn’t much reason for it to come up in conversations. I suspect I used it here because I’ve read Trent describe his education as such, and that’s about all i know about his schooling.

Still, the meaning is generally understood. I’ve never heard anyone express any sort of opinion about the phrase at all, and am surprised it is so controversial to you.

Not everyone uses the term “hard science.” It’s not part of my vocabulary or of the vocabularies of any of the scientists (or other folks with science degrees) that I know in person. Maybe it’s more common in some science circles than in others?

None of the music education majorsI know (roomates and floormates with many) actually teach music.

You must admit quantitative science takes one kind of skill that not everyone has – but so do most other majors.

I know that the “hard” in “hard science” means “quantitative,” as opposed to the “soft sciences,” which are non-quantitative. But my theory is that people who like to talk about having studied “the hard sciences” do so because they like the association with “hard” meaning “difficult” (thereby implying that people who study them must all be super-smart). And I have to say, you’re not exactly disproving that theory.

johanna – Not all of them, just any of them. (Obviously…)

My 2 cents.

I actually don’t know anyone who majored in “the hard sciences” (what, all of them?), but as someone with more science degrees than most people, I’ll say that I do *not* think that non-science classes are “pretty easy.” At least, not for me – all of my lowest grades in college came in my non-science classes (even including an education class!) Reading hundreds of pages every week and writing multiple 20-page term papers? No thank you. Give me problem sets and lab reports any day.

But I always wanted to become a travel journalists. thing is, there’s no money there. So like Trent, I’m building on my existing career (biz journ) to do what I love (travel writing/blogging)

I ran into an event photographer at a career fair once and asked him how he got started. He said, “Well, I just got started” and then proceded to rant about how shitty photography is as a career. His income has dropped by half in the past 5 years. Just something to consider.

The one universal trait- they never, ever, sold their work at a low price. They started high, and stayed high, and it created demand. They never gave away art, not until already rich. Picasso had the famous incident of the napkin signature for a waitress when he said- that’ll be 10,000. But he was a bit of a …

Just sayin. A friend who ran a NYC gallery on 57th sent me the article, and said- “Yes, yes, yes! Stop giving away your work-art is all about prestige, and you devalue yourself when you give it away or sell it cheap. Galleries won’t touch you if you do.” So if this girl wants to photo weddings- no matter. If she wants to be a serious fine art photographer- it matters.

Not to mention, good amateurs who post on flicker (flicker terms allow them to mine and sell photos, and the photog does not know or get a dime in the money exchanged.) undercut the very profession they hope to be a part of, driving down prices. Most pro photogs I worked with as an art director now have day jobs (people who shot for Getty, and did photoshots with famous authors-not schlubs- insanely talented people making 5K a day) and can no longer spend all their time on that passion, as a result of the glut of free photos online. That’s a loss to us all.

I suggest you watch Harlan Ellison’s “Dreams with Sharp Teeth” (not with kids around- he is colorful), to see how this also effects your own profession. Ask your library to get it. (Harlan Ellison has won Hugos, Nebulas, and is a Grand Master).

Spoken like someone who never majored in education.” Ditto that. I already had an undergrad in design, and a masters in interactive art (computer based) and a long pro history in the arts, and in training m staff on computer art programs.

I thought it was ridiculous that NY state required me to get a SECOND masters to teach art, because I did not minor in Ed as an undergrad (they did not do allow that at many top art schools when I studied). I figured it would be a cake walk. Not so, especially in the class that required lengthy analysis of various pedagogies and how they overlapped or were related to various schools of philosophy- Kant, Nietsche, etc. Or the full 300 page curriculum for our subject each student had to write over a 3-month stretch- for ONE class. Or the child development class that required about 40 outside hours of qualitative research before even beginning the reports. Or the student teaching that was an hour and a half away, followed by hours of reports, and self-evaluations. And I write fast.

What a thoughtless comment. Maybe in some crappy little college that crack might be true, but not for the majority of ed programs.

I’m not saying it is true. Besides, don’t you think engineers are arrogant know-it-alls? That reputation is slightly deserved, at least when it comes to passing judgment on college majors. :)