Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

dony898 wrote:Everyone dunks on English majors until they need help writing a single coherent sentence on LinkedIn.

I had to write a job description recently and used AI for the first to time to do it. It was pretty dam* good. I just had to tweak it a bit. I was a bit shocked.

I saw a video of a fake podcast created by Google Gemini for a technical manual. It was shockingly amazing.

I think many, if not most, people find it to be good because they can't write to save their arse so anything that's comprehensible is going to be good.

But, it was really good for a job description. It's not the Harvard Review.

Well if one can barely string two sentences together, I'm sure its great.

It was actually half a page with bullets. It was pretty good - clear and concise. If an English major wrote it would've been verbose and flowery. That doesn't fly in my industry.

My kid was in an IB magnet, and I think it was a great program for them, made them stronger writers. But, do you know what all the kids called IB? "I Bulls*!t".

I'm not an English major but I know enough that English majors are taught precisely not to be flowery and verbose!

I don't recall being taught anything about writing. I think most people who choose to major in English are pretty good writers beforehand.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

dony898 wrote:Everyone dunks on English majors until they need help writing a single coherent sentence on LinkedIn.

I had to write a job description recently and used AI for the first to time to do it. It was pretty dam* good. I just had to tweak it a bit. I was a bit shocked.

I saw a video of a fake podcast created by Google Gemini for a technical manual. It was shockingly amazing.

I think many, if not most, people find it to be good because they can't write to save their arse so anything that's comprehensible is going to be good.

But, it was really good for a job description. It's not the Harvard Review.

Well if one can barely string two sentences together, I'm sure its great.

It was actually half a page with bullets. It was pretty good - clear and concise. If an English major wrote it would've been verbose and flowery. That doesn't fly in my industry.

My kid was in an IB magnet, and I think it was a great program for them, made them stronger writers. But, do you know what all the kids called IB? "I Bulls*!t".

I'm not an English major but I know enough that English majors are taught precisely not to be flowery and verbose!

Only those focusing on creative writing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An example of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales in Middle English. Understanding it is only the beginning.

"Whan that Aprill with his shoures soote

The droghte of Marche hath perced to the roote,

And bathed every veyne in swich licour,

Of which vertu engendred is the flour."

but, why do people need to understand this? I read Shakespeare, Flaubert, etc.. but I don't see the point in needing to understand very old English. My DH is English. He doesn't even like reading those types of books

Which then begs the question, why do I need to study so many subjects that I will never use in my career? It's not necessarily the specific subject matter that's important, its the the thought processes and skills that we develop that's important.

I can understand learning history, social science, but none of those classes are taught in ye olde English. So, again, why does one need to understand Chaucer's old English?

I think it's important to read some classics, but I don't think it's important to read every classic.

Majoring in English is not only (or primarily) about reading the classics. It's about thinking about literature and the ways that literature reflect (or doesn't reflect) society and our culture. It's about expanding our imaginations and empathy through seeing the world through others' perspectives. And it's about close reading and defending ideas with specific examples.

I agree with you, but sadly that is what is lacking in today's society and spefically here on DCUM

Dcum -- and the world -- would be a better place with more English majors and fewer business majors.

We need more doctors and nurses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know women’s studies, studio art, and political science majors from my LAC, who went to medical school.

3% of med school students were/are humanities majors

It’s safe to say nobody knows many English majors who became doctors because it’s statistically impossible.

But you may know some.

Statistically if you know 33 doctors one of them majored in humanities. To know two you need to know 67 doctors. To know “a few” or you need to know hundreds of doctors.

That’s all humanities…not just English (poli sci most popular humanities major BTW). We are talking specifically English majors which is the title of the thread.

You probably have to know 150-200 doctors to know one that was an English major.

Gracious, I was an English major and even I understand that's not how probability works. You do not "have to know 150-200 doctors" to know one who was an English major. You can know just one doctor - the one in 150 who was an English major.

And that’s why people look down on English majors. If you look at the prior post it started with the word “statistically”, meaning on average. You’re confusing a possible outcome with the probability that said outcome is realized. Where’s that sharp critical thinking that English majors supposedly develop while analyzing Shakespeare? Businesses will not pay you money for these trite arguments, you need to be productive.

I'm the PP English major. Precision matters, and you were being imprecise to serve a false argument.
The statement "Statistically if you know 33 doctors, one of them majored in humanities" is not the same as "Statistically you would need to know 33 doctors to know one who majored in humanities."
But, you (or somebody) conflated the two and then doubled down on that second formulation to suggest that it's impossible the other PP knows a few / more than a few doctors who were humanities majors. "You'd have to know x number of people ..." was offered to show that there's no way they actually know that many people in the category. But, of course, that does not follow from the statistic. It's entirely possible that PP knows a dozen humanities majors who became doctors, for all sorts of reasons - perhaps PP is a member of an alumni club with that focus. Perhaps several friends all met at a liberal arts college and then became doctors. Perhaps all of PP's family members have that educational background. When you misuse statistics, you come to false conclusions and overlook interesting possibilities.

Fascinating! English majors can critically analyze mathematical concepts; yet most STEM folks can't write a quality research or scientific paper, or clearly explain something in layman terms to someone who doesn't know science, and I doubt would comparatively analyze two excerpts from literature with as much skill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:English major here- no student loans. I'm not sure why the OP think English majors are full of student loans that taxpayers have to pay? While everyone picks on us, we are very employable.

I was responding a PP who stated that they were an English major and had loans, but hey, at least they get to read great books and do some creative writing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

dony898 wrote:Everyone dunks on English majors until they need help writing a single coherent sentence on LinkedIn.

I had to write a job description recently and used AI for the first to time to do it. It was pretty dam* good. I just had to tweak it a bit. I was a bit shocked.

I saw a video of a fake podcast created by Google Gemini for a technical manual. It was shockingly amazing.

I think many, if not most, people find it to be good because they can't write to save their arse so anything that's comprehensible is going to be good.

But, it was really good for a job description. It's not the Harvard Review.

Well if one can barely string two sentences together, I'm sure its great.

It was actually half a page with bullets. It was pretty good - clear and concise. If an English major wrote it would've been verbose and flowery. That doesn't fly in my industry.

My kid was in an IB magnet, and I think it was a great program for them, made them stronger writers. But, do you know what all the kids called IB? "I Bulls*!t".

I'm not an English major but I know enough that English majors are taught precisely not to be flowery and verbose!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know women’s studies, studio art, and political science majors from my LAC, who went to medical school.

3% of med school students were/are humanities majors

It’s safe to say nobody knows many English majors who became doctors because it’s statistically impossible.

But you may know some.

Statistically if you know 33 doctors one of them majored in humanities. To know two you need to know 67 doctors. To know “a few” or you need to know hundreds of doctors.

That’s all humanities…not just English (poli sci most popular humanities major BTW). We are talking specifically English majors which is the title of the thread.

You probably have to know 150-200 doctors to know one that was an English major.

Gracious, I was an English major and even I understand that's not how probability works. You do not "have to know 150-200 doctors" to know one who was an English major. You can know just one doctor - the one in 150 who was an English major.

And that’s why people look down on English majors. If you look at the prior post it started with the word “statistically”, meaning on average. You’re confusing a possible outcome with the probability that said outcome is realized. Where’s that sharp critical thinking that English majors supposedly develop while analyzing Shakespeare? Businesses will not pay you money for these trite arguments, you need to be productive.

I'm not the PP but PP was not wrong. Perhaps PP was playing on the words as an English major. While the probability of an event happening before it occurs might be less than 100%, once the event has happened, it is certain, and its probability becomes 1 (or 100%).

Another English major? The event that happened is an outcome, it’s not that it’s probability becomes 100%. Probability is number of favorable outcome divided by number of possible outcomes. If you’re still confused ask ChatGPT explain it to you.

I took your advice and did:
You are asking if the probability of an event becomes \(100\%\) after its outcome is known.  What's given in the problem  The question implies an event with an initial probability less than \(100\%\).  Helpful information  Probability is a measure of the likelihood of an event occurring. A probability of \(1\) (or \(100\%\)) signifies certainty.  How to solve  Determine if the probability of an event changes to certainty once its outcome is observed.  Step 1 . Consider the definition of probability. Probability quantifies the chance of an event before it happens. Step 2 . Analyze the state after an outcome is known. Once an event has occurred and its outcome is observed, the outcome is no longer uncertain. The event has either happened or not happened. Step 3 . Conclude on the probability. If the event occurred, its probability of having occurred becomes \(1\) or \(100\%\). If the event did not occur, its probability of having occurred becomes \(0\) or \(0\%\). Solution  Yes, once the outcome of an event is known, the probability of that specific outcome having occurred becomes \(100\%\).

Anonymous wrote:English major here- no student loans. I'm not sure why the OP think English majors are full of student loans that taxpayers have to pay? While everyone picks on us, we are very employable.

Anonymous wrote:History and English were considered respectable majors in the past. I know many who went on to law school or medical school. They’re generally thought to have good writing and analytical skills. Now, people scoff when you saying you’re majoring in English or history. I know there’s AI to worry about, but isn’t that true for CS and accounting too?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know women’s studies, studio art, and political science majors from my LAC, who went to medical school.

3% of med school students were/are humanities majors

It’s safe to say nobody knows many English majors who became doctors because it’s statistically impossible.

But you may know some.

Statistically if you know 33 doctors one of them majored in humanities. To know two you need to know 67 doctors. To know “a few” or you need to know hundreds of doctors.

That’s all humanities…not just English (poli sci most popular humanities major BTW). We are talking specifically English majors which is the title of the thread.

You probably have to know 150-200 doctors to know one that was an English major.

Gracious, I was an English major and even I understand that's not how probability works. You do not "have to know 150-200 doctors" to know one who was an English major. You can know just one doctor - the one in 150 who was an English major.

And that’s why people look down on English majors. If you look at the prior post it started with the word “statistically”, meaning on average. You’re confusing a possible outcome with the probability that said outcome is realized. Where’s that sharp critical thinking that English majors supposedly develop while analyzing Shakespeare? Businesses will not pay you money for these trite arguments, you need to be productive.

I'm the PP English major. Precision matters, and you were being imprecise to serve a false argument.
The statement "Statistically if you know 33 doctors, one of them majored in humanities" is not the same as "Statistically you would need to know 33 doctors to know one who majored in humanities."
But, you (or somebody) conflated the two and then doubled down on that second formulation to suggest that it's impossible the other PP knows a few / more than a few doctors who were humanities majors. "You'd have to know x number of people ..." was offered to show that there's no way they actually know that many people in the category. But, of course, that does not follow from the statistic. It's entirely possible that PP knows a dozen humanities majors who became doctors, for all sorts of reasons - perhaps PP is a member of an alumni club with that focus. Perhaps several friends all met at a liberal arts college and then became doctors. Perhaps all of PP's family members have that educational background. When you misuse statistics, you come to false conclusions and overlook interesting possibilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know women’s studies, studio art, and political science majors from my LAC, who went to medical school.

3% of med school students were/are humanities majors

It’s safe to say nobody knows many English majors who became doctors because it’s statistically impossible.

But you may know some.

Statistically if you know 33 doctors one of them majored in humanities. To know two you need to know 67 doctors. To know “a few” or you need to know hundreds of doctors.

That’s all humanities…not just English (poli sci most popular humanities major BTW). We are talking specifically English majors which is the title of the thread.

You probably have to know 150-200 doctors to know one that was an English major.

Gracious, I was an English major and even I understand that's not how probability works. You do not "have to know 150-200 doctors" to know one who was an English major. You can know just one doctor - the one in 150 who was an English major.

And that’s why people look down on English majors. If you look at the prior post it started with the word “statistically”, meaning on average. You’re confusing a possible outcome with the probability that said outcome is realized. Where’s that sharp critical thinking that English majors supposedly develop while analyzing Shakespeare? Businesses will not pay you money for these trite arguments, you need to be productive.

I'm not the PP but PP was not wrong. Perhaps PP was playing on the words as an English major. While the probability of an event happening before it occurs might be less than 100%, once the event has happened, it is certain, and its probability becomes 1 (or 100%).

Anonymous wrote:Chaucer, that's another one I never read. If only my parents knew, they were already not thrilled with the English degree but I didn't even read half the books. I did watch all the movies though. Somehow I got a great job working for the government.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The wealthiest person I know (a multi-millionaire) majored in English, went on later to get an MBA, and successfully started two companies. He encouraged his own children to get a solid liberal arts education before picking a career.

+1000

It’s sad we have completely abandoned liberal arts as a base education. Society is worse off for it. No framework for history, geography, religions, ethics, etc. The fall of civilization. We have a front row seat to it right now.

Those that don’t learn history are doomed to repeat it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An example of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales in Middle English. Understanding it is only the beginning.

"Whan that Aprill with his shoures soote

The droghte of Marche hath perced to the roote,

And bathed every veyne in swich licour,

Of which vertu engendred is the flour."

Oof, I remember having to recite this for class. "Shoor-us soot-eh ..."

Now try writing a critical analysis on it using Middle English, lol