A friend was asking me the other day why did I choose to do Arts when I could do other more intelligent courses. A strange question actually, as in what does it mean by an “intelligent” course anyway? And what is so “unintelligent” about the course I am going to take?
If taking Arts and Humanities is considered as “not as intelligent” than those taking Science and Engineering, then fine, I am not intelligent, not that I ever said I am intelligent in the first place.
But it is sad to see the stereotypical narrow-minded mindset of people that those who went to the Arts stream are goners. They will never have a bright future, and they will forever lose out in results and future career prospects.
All the top secondary schools now have only Science streams, no Arts. Only the neighbourhood schools still have Arts stream, but only one or two classes, and it is always those with the worst results that got streamed to the Arts classes.
With “reputation” like this, it is no wonder Arts students got ostracized as not being “intelligent”. Afterall, one does not see the Normal stream pupils doing science; more often than not they have to take Arts.
Even for university entrance, those who can just make the grade can only enter the Arts faculty, whereas those who got accepted into the Science faculty have to score one notch higher. Thus most parents will want their kids to do Science so they can score better and have better choices.
What makes people think that Humanities subjects are that easy to study anyway? Perhaps science involves complicating formulas and concepts, thus only people with near-genius IQs are able to do well as only very smart people can grasp the concepts.
I know I cannot, which explains why I am not smart. That is not to say that all those who did Arts are unintelligent. I have friends who majored in Arts, and they are really intelligent too.
People think that Humanities subjects only require memory work, so anyone with a good memory is able to do it. One does not need intelligence to memorise things. That is so not true! It involves more than memory work! It involves analyzing, critiquing, arguing, different points of view, looking at things and issues from an objective point.
Mere memorizing or rote-learning does not help if one is not able to use the sequence of events or points involved to bring across one’s own point of view objectively and convincingly. For instance, the fact is that Raffles founded Singapore, but anyone can argue that he did not “found” Singapore, since the island already existed long before he even stepped on its shores.
That is what makes Humanities interesting, as there is no fixed right or wrong answer, unlike in Mathematics where one either gets the formula right or wrong. But in Humanities, there can be a broad spectrum of answers, and no one can ever fail as long as they are able to argue their point convincingly.
On the other hand, because the answer is not fixed, thus most people find it very hard to score well in those subjects. So I think those who can score well for Humanities subjects are actually the most intelligent of the lot, since they are able to do subjects which most people are not able to.
Now if Humanities students are really deemed as not intelligent, then why do the premier junior colleges offer Humanities Scholarships and these scholars enter specialized Humanities programmes of the schools?
There has never been a Science scholarship for science programmes. Or perhaps the Humanities Scholarships are to attract pupils to apply for the Arts stream, since most students would apply for the Science stream anyway.
People think getting a Humanities scholarship is so easy. They think that anyone who chooses to do Arts will be able to get the scholarship. I wonder where they get the idea from? Like every scholarship, its criterias are very strict, so those who can actually receive the scholarship in the first place are normally the crème de la crème of ‘O’ level students.
Thus those taking Arts are not necessarily lower-scorers or less intelligent. If anything, they are probably more intelligent to be able to do such subjects so proficiently. How I wish I can be half as good. I really must learn how Humanities majors manage to score so well in their examinations.
If taking Arts and Humanities is considered as “not as intelligent” than those taking Science and Engineering, then fine, I am not intelligent, not that I ever said I am intelligent in the first place.
But it is sad to see the stereotypical narrow-minded mindset of people that those who went to the Arts stream are goners. They will never have a bright future, and they will forever lose out in results and future career prospects.
All the top secondary schools now have only Science streams, no Arts. Only the neighbourhood schools still have Arts stream, but only one or two classes, and it is always those with the worst results that got streamed to the Arts classes.
With “reputation” like this, it is no wonder Arts students got ostracized as not being “intelligent”. Afterall, one does not see the Normal stream pupils doing science; more often than not they have to take Arts.
Even for university entrance, those who can just make the grade can only enter the Arts faculty, whereas those who got accepted into the Science faculty have to score one notch higher. Thus most parents will want their kids to do Science so they can score better and have better choices.
What makes people think that Humanities subjects are that easy to study anyway? Perhaps science involves complicating formulas and concepts, thus only people with near-genius IQs are able to do well as only very smart people can grasp the concepts.
I know I cannot, which explains why I am not smart. That is not to say that all those who did Arts are unintelligent. I have friends who majored in Arts, and they are really intelligent too.
People think that Humanities subjects only require memory work, so anyone with a good memory is able to do it. One does not need intelligence to memorise things. That is so not true! It involves more than memory work! It involves analyzing, critiquing, arguing, different points of view, looking at things and issues from an objective point.
Mere memorizing or rote-learning does not help if one is not able to use the sequence of events or points involved to bring across one’s own point of view objectively and convincingly. For instance, the fact is that Raffles founded Singapore, but anyone can argue that he did not “found” Singapore, since the island already existed long before he even stepped on its shores.
That is what makes Humanities interesting, as there is no fixed right or wrong answer, unlike in Mathematics where one either gets the formula right or wrong. But in Humanities, there can be a broad spectrum of answers, and no one can ever fail as long as they are able to argue their point convincingly.
On the other hand, because the answer is not fixed, thus most people find it very hard to score well in those subjects. So I think those who can score well for Humanities subjects are actually the most intelligent of the lot, since they are able to do subjects which most people are not able to.
Now if Humanities students are really deemed as not intelligent, then why do the premier junior colleges offer Humanities Scholarships and these scholars enter specialized Humanities programmes of the schools?
There has never been a Science scholarship for science programmes. Or perhaps the Humanities Scholarships are to attract pupils to apply for the Arts stream, since most students would apply for the Science stream anyway.
People think getting a Humanities scholarship is so easy. They think that anyone who chooses to do Arts will be able to get the scholarship. I wonder where they get the idea from? Like every scholarship, its criterias are very strict, so those who can actually receive the scholarship in the first place are normally the crème de la crème of ‘O’ level students.
Thus those taking Arts are not necessarily lower-scorers or less intelligent. If anything, they are probably more intelligent to be able to do such subjects so proficiently. How I wish I can be half as good. I really must learn how Humanities majors manage to score so well in their examinations.
5 comments:
Actually, I feel that Arts students have mre cognitive power than Science students. Take GP for example. Most Art Students are able to anaylse the question and answer in their own creative way. However, most Science students, being so syllabi-oriented, tend not to do so well in GP.
Is it? Not sure about the cognitive power part though, but personally I wish I could have the ability to do better in science, then I could have scored better and had more options for courses.
science students CAN do well in arts. it's just different. the way that science and arts students think. you cannot compare and say who's smarter and who's not. it's a different way of analysing
besides. there's no definite science or arts stream now. the moe let's people intercross subjects.
yeah.
I was an arts student in JC and a couple of my friends scored single-digital aggregate for their 'O's. Does that meant they are less intelligent than someone who has a higher aggregate but got into Science because of bonus awarded for affiliation and ECA?
It's childish get involve in that argument. It's like a NUS graduate saying he's smarter and deserves more pay and promotion than a NTU or poly grad with more experience.
I'd like to think of arts student as people who has more appreciate for life than its monetary values.
Most lawyers are arts student and most politicans are lawyers. Can we use this as a gauge?
Anon : Yes, I know. And I think it's better to be interdisciplinary than pure science or arts.
Leecooper : I was a Humanities scholar in JC, and I did Law and Arts. Tell the people who said Arts students are less intelligent that they are childish, not me. And yes, I do have more appreciation for life than just monetary values.
Post a Comment