This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
The harder degree=science and easier degree=liberal arts is a myth, and an insulting one. A lot of people who are decent or better than decent at math and science struggle with liberal arts, and a lot of people who struggle in science and math are extremely above average in liberal arts, and can be more intelligent overall than a science-favoring counterpart. It's easier to find good liberal arts teachers than good science teachers, a bit of a self-propagating situation, but science-oriented people would be wise not to assume another person is less intelligent or less hardworking because that person chose a different major. Thus, the character mentioned on the page could conceivably struggle for a liberal arts degree, and not a science one.
Ununnilium: Needs filled out more, obviously; I'm drawing a blank at the moment.
Seth This accounts for most the people in my old film class and i'm sure a good number of The Contributors here.
ripjack: As an Aspie
, I'm somewhat offended to be described as being "the victim of a mental disorder." This is an ethnic-esque stereotype perpetrated by aggressive neurotypicals, who are generally xenophobes.
Fast Eddie: Hey! Who you calling 'typical?! I'm a fan, which makes me a xenophile. Anyways, the edit was appropriate. BTW, Seth was making the same statement, in that Brit understatement/self-disparaging sort of way that Brits have. It's a humor thing.
Ununnilium: You damn muties!
Ununnilium: "Except plenty of ones that don't." Huh?
Air Of Mystery: Mine, sorry.
Ununnilium:
While there are some who are annoyed by the social ineptitude shown by the main characters, this editor will be honest: The main character (whose shining point of brilliance thusfar has been successfully apologizing for having part in cleaning a sleeping woman's apartment) is more socially inclined than I am.
Conversation In The Main Page.
Also, how is the Sydney White example a parody?
______________________________
Rutee: High, I'm just taking a 'trope example' that has nothing to do with any of this off. Leaving it here in full for if others decide I'm wrong. It just shows a kid the media calls intelligent made one stupid conclusion, not that the kid is in fact a genius (Though intense knowledge of an odd hobby is a sign) *OR* that he's socially inept. Seems to just be a spot for the troper who added it to vent.
- A real life example of this trope is all the attention that is given to the so-called child genius Noah McCullough. He has made numerous talk show appearances, where he shows off his unique gift: raw memorization of disparate presidential trivia facts. He has even published two books on presidential trivia, and intends to run for president himself in 2032 on the Republican ticket. The problem? He has said that history will remember George W. Bush as the greatest president since Abraham Lincoln. More can be read here. Memorization is not the same as critical thinking and is not a demonstration of genius intelligence, despite how easily it impresses average people.
- Nor is deciding someone is not a genius just because you disagree with their conclusions.
- Oh snap! You just got told!
