This is www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=3107891's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=3107891's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=3107891
Recent Activity
As a second person named Ted, who took engineering courses at the university Dan Erwin mentioned, I feel compelled to jump in. If there are engineering programs that work from a liberal arts perspective, WashU isn't one of them. Engineering mathematics was as dry, biomechanics followed the textbook, electrical networks felt like it hadn't been updated since the 50s, engineering stats was cookbook, machine learning spent most of its time detailing the technicalities of particular algorithms, and so on. All except one or two of my engineering classes felt like technical education. Does technical education teach you how to think? Some concepts from calculus, differential equations, optimization, etc could perhaps be applied by analogy to things in general. I'd say for the most part, engineering education as it was in my experience makes you better at engineering, but not at thinking in general. Two possible exceptions: - Economics education, which for me at least, provides new angles on entire classes of other issues (ethics, business, ...) - Brilliant teachers, like Feynman. For example, see his lecture "Law of Gravitation - An Example of Physical Law" (http://research.microsoft.com/apps/tools/tuva/index.html). You learn the law of gravitation, but it's only used to ground a more abstract discussion about physical laws in general. An uncle of mine took Feynman's classes; Feynman didn't teach you how to solve homework problems, but rather used physics to teach you how to think. He left you to learn the technicalities on your own, which was apparently really hard (nearly all the undergraduates dropped out of the course) P.S. The other Ted seems cool but I guess I'll comment with my full name from now on so people can tell us apart.
1 reply