What should I do? I can't decide whether to go into hard science or social science?

What should I do? I can't decide whether to go into hard science or social science? Topic: phd conclusion
June 16, 2019 / By Sommer
Question: I'm 21 years old and a junior in college. I used to be interested in both molecular biology and psychology, and I wanted to become a genetic counselor. Once I got to college though, I realized that double majoring in both of these subjects would be pretty unrealistic with all the classes needed in each. (I went to community college for my first two years, and the biology and chemistry classes they offered didn't transfer) I decided to major in molecular biology. After a semester though, I felt like I was really missing something and started to envy my friends in psychology/history/etc. who were learning seriously interesting things about humanity while I was doing chemistry and physics. It was probably a bad idea in hindsight, but I decided to take a semester of psychology classes, telling myself that I'd become a regular mental illness therapist instead. After one semester of psychology, I've come to the conclusion that: a) It's too easy, b) It's boring, c) It's not something I want to continue with. Since I finished that last semester, I've had a huge problem trying to make plans. No matter what I do, I feel like I'm missing out on something. I want to find something to be passionate about and go on to get a Masters or PhD in it to become a researcher or author. What should I do? tl;dr: I'm interested in too many things. How can I choose a major?
Best Answer

Best Answers: What should I do? I can't decide whether to go into hard science or social science?

Pollyanna Pollyanna | 3 days ago
Genetic counselor's are not psychologists. As far as choosing a major, it's too late, and you didn't tell us how you performed in your other classes. Senior year is too late to pick a major, and you can't go into a major if you're doing poorly in the classes. For molecular bio, the masters and then PhD level is exponentially more difficult than the classes you've already had,if you haven't been getting As with relative ease, forget about it. Also a master's takes 2 years and the PhD will take 6-10 years. You can't start that path without being committed to it either.
👍 274 | 👎 3
Did you like the answer? What should I do? I can't decide whether to go into hard science or social science? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: phd conclusion

Pollyanna Originally Answered: How hard of a major is computer science?
It depends on the individual. I am not good at creating code, but I was always pretty good at tweaking or hacking it to make it come up with the same end result with cleaner code. I hope that makes sense. That said, if you like coding - and who doesn't?!? - I like writing solutions to problems. I think of coding like solving a puzzle by recreating the pieces. "Hard" depends on the viewpoint of the person learning the process. Best wishes for much success, always!
Pollyanna Originally Answered: How hard of a major is computer science?
A computer science major is just as hard as an engineering or physics major. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. The reason: CS covers lots and lots of programming which is not for everyone! The programming in CS is more advanced than programming in engineering majors. Physics doesn't cover programming.
Pollyanna Originally Answered: How hard of a major is computer science?
Laptop Science is a difficult foremost but when its whatever that you just like and enjoy then it would now not be as hard for you. I am a graduating Comp Sci main myself at Cal State Northridge and i hate math. The Comp classes are easy for me however it rather depends upon who instructing it and the substances at hand. At my school I suppose the percent of chucking up the sponge of the most important after/during taking the intro to algorithm type is around 30-forty%. You can be excellent in math but when you can't write code at all, you're gonna wrestle. Math is my worst discipline and at my tuition we need to take university Algebra, Trig, Cal 1,2, Linear Algebra, Discrete math, utilized Statistic, Combinatorial Algorithm and Automata. Homework can variety from issues within the e-book or just undeniable writing packages. If your within the intro courses then you can have tasks but when your lecture come with a lab section, then more often than not the professor will take that time to support you on the undertaking. For individuals in my fundamental, we most of the time wait til just like the last week mark to finish our project but it relies on how enormous the assignment is. I'll say the amount of time you might have to spend to your assignment is in actual fact the amount of time you might be given to whole it, naked in intellect you have different lessons too. In the event you conclude writing your software early then thats excellent due to the fact that the majority of the time might be testing your application to make certain it work. 30% of the time should be spent on writing the application then 70% of the time should be spent on testing your program. That you could entire your software but when it does not do what the teacher needs or absorb invalid input which can reason your software to crash or go in a endless loop, you are going to get penalize for it. So best advice is to whole writing your application as quick as you can. Then spend the majority of the time testing it when you consider that even after you publish/turn it in, you could in finding more bugs. Fine of luck within the area in the event you determined to stick with it

Maude Maude
Stick with the "hard" science program and get your B.Sc. But then think about your options. Yes you could continue in that field. But maybe you might want to study the History of Science at the graduate level or go in to an STS (Science and Technology Studies) programme. Or maybe you want to do into science policy. If you have room for another Arts elective in your program try taking a history of science course just as a starter. Good luck.
👍 120 | 👎 -2

Maude Originally Answered: Based on Science liberals are more accepting to new social, scientific or religious ideas. Who do you want?
Yep, I knew this already, and here's some more. Note that these studies can't be liberally biased because they're based on the interviewees' own political answers. --- As kids, liberals had developed close relationships with peers and were rated by their teachers as self-reliant, energetic, impulsive, and resilient. [They] are higher on openness, which includes intellectual curiosity, excitement-seeking, novelty, creativity for its own sake, and a craving for stimulation like travel, color, art, music, and literature. Multiple studies find that liberals are more optimistic. [They] are more likely to like classical music and jazz, conservatives, country music. Liberal men like romantic comedies more than conservative men. Liberal women are more likely than conservative women to enjoy books, poetry, writing in a diary, acting, and playing musical instruments. Liberals are messier than conservatives, their rooms have more clutter and more color, and they tend to have more travel documents, maps of other countries, and flags from around the world. Liberals have more books, and their books cover a greater variety of topics. Liberals... are "more likely to see gray areas and reconcile seemingly conflicting information." As a result, liberals like John Kerry, who see many sides to every issue, are portrayed as flip-floppers.
Maude Originally Answered: Based on Science liberals are more accepting to new social, scientific or religious ideas. Who do you want?
Science education is important, learning what scientific theory is is also important. Teaching kids to think, kids who may be the future scientists or doctors in our country. Doctors who understand diseases, scientists who study them and create cures because of evolution. In the past 100 years we have seen over 100 new strains of diseases that evolved and now effect us. These are important things and we should encourage those who are interested to learn as much as they can. By teaching the lie that creationism is a valid alternative may keep some potential very smart people from even learning they have an interest in this. Listen, there are people who believe the holocaust didn't happen, should that be taught as a valid alternative in history so that kids can know the controversy? It's the same with science. People can believe what they want but when it comes to science classes and progress in the scientific community it should be left to the scientists to determine what is valid not someone who doesn't understand it or have all the facts. That would be limiting our potential as a country,we've had some of the best minds but to hinder those minds because of religion is a waste.

If you have your own answer to the question phd conclusion, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.