Physics or Psych?

[ZanMD]

I'm kind of torn on which undergrad to pursue. I've always had an avid interest in psychology, but physics has a draw for me as well. But I was talking to a school official and he was telling me the adcoms will look more favorably on physics as it's not the health sciences norm (biomedical, biology, etc) that most med students pursue. I'm assuming psych falls into the "norm"

So do adcoms look upon psych less favorably then say, a physics major? Is there no difference in the way they view it? Any input from psych or physics majors on how you were recieved?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Brickhouse]

I would think that Psych would make you more "people oriented" and help you continue to develop your own reasons for wanting to pursue medicine in the first place. Physics seems like an engineers major. I don't know, that's just what I think. What about a double major?

 

[bella_dottoressa]

Yeah, you could double. I'm doing so in bio and psych and it's very doable. If you don't want to go that route though I would really at the risk of sounding trite say to just do whichever one you think you'll be happier doing. It just doesn't ever seem worth it, or ever seem to really pay off to pick a major that adcoms will like.

 

[ZanMD]

Well I'm interested in both, so I could double in it, but if not I'd go psych because I'd actually be able to use it. I'm not interested in going into physics medicine area, so it would only end up being for my own edification.

 

[Nutmeg]

I was once majoring in psych. Then one day I saw a coworker tapping the lid of his soda can, so that it would explode when he opened it. So I started telling him tat the onlyt point in tapping the lid is taht it forces you to wait for the CO2 to be reabsorbed. Then I started explaing the breakdown of carbonic acid into water and CO2, and that the process waas reversible, and by L'Chaterlier's principle the pressure would force the reaction back... and he said, "Dude... Why are you majoring in psychology?" It was at that moment I realized no one would ever respect my degree at all if I majored in psych.

If you succeed in getting into med school, then fine, whatever you like won't make a difference. But if you don't (God forbid) or you need to work in the interim, physics would likely be more useful. Statistically, physics major have a better shot of getting in to med school.

Just my $0.02. Please don't hate me psych majors (at least, not any more than you already do.)

 

[Bones2008]

I also had a little bit of a tough time when I was deciding what to major in. To find out what I should do I simply asked myself, "If I don't go into medicine, what would I want to be doing?" Try that and see if it works.

 

[DD214_DOC]

Someone told me the same thing when I explained to them why their sister was acting like an idiot.

He said, "Why are you majoring in Chemistry again?" Thus I am a psych major. For some reason, people seem to think that explaining a wheel rolling down a hill is more "intellectual" than explaining the behavioral and neurobiological processes of a schizophrenic.

Think of it this way: everyone knows how classical physics work. The only *real* areas of advancement for physics are at the atomic and astrophysical levels, and maybe particle physics. Psychology is a new and very young discipline, with plenty of room for advancement. Not to mention the human mind is probably one of the most complex things to study. An undergraduate degree just scratches the surface.

Not to mention, psych is a varied field of study. Neuro? Cognitive? Developmental? Learning & Memory? Social?

I had this debate between psychology and physics myself. Eventually, I decided, "Well, if I go to med school I will never use physics". Psychology is something you will use the rest of your life, regardless of which career you choose.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by JKDMed
Someone told me the same thing when I explained to them why their sister was acting like an idiot.

He said, "Why are you majoring in Chemistry again?" Thus I am a psych major. For some reason, people seem to think that explaining a wheel rolling down a hill is more "intellectual" than explaining the behavioral and neurobiological processes of a schizophrenic.

Think of it this way: everyone knows how classical physics work. The only *real* areas of advancement for physics are at the atomic and astrophysical levels, and maybe particle physics. Psychology is a new and very young discipline, with plenty of room for advancement. Not to mention the human mind is probably one of the most complex things to study. An undergraduate degree just scratches the surface.

Not to mention, psych is a varied field of study. Neuro? Cognitive? Developmental? Learning & Memory? Social?

I had this debate between psychology and physics myself. Eventually, I decided, "Well, if I go to med school I will never use physics". Psychology is something you will use the rest of your life, regardless of which career you choose.

Comment ironique!

I think my problem is largely that an undergraduate degree just scratches the surface. My bigger problem is that while young professors in psych have a clear understanding as to what need to occur in the field if the field is to ever get respect (eg, focus on quantifiable ideas, behavioral, cognitive, neuro, and get Freud the f*** out of the curriculum), a lot of the older teachers are still clinging to antiquated notions of psychoanalytic bullcrap. Science is science, and humanities are humanities, and the field of psychology has to decide which category it belongs in.

I agree that the human mind is the more interesting field with greater application to your real life. Hence, I'm pursuing two degrees; a BS in chemical engineering to get that respect that my fragile sense of self requires, and a BA in molecular and cell neurobiology to help me have the background necessary to understand advances in the frounteirs of behavioral science.

 

[missmod]

Apparently, there is a field of study called psycho-physics. It has a bit to do with neuroscience and the biological basis of pyschology and the physics behind it (i.e. electricity, circuits...)

 

[DD214_DOC]

I think psych gets plenty of respect. After all, certain advances in medicine and science have been attributed to advances of psychology. (psychosomatic medicine anyone?)

As far as whether psych is a humanities or a science, why does it have to choose? It seems to be doing both quite effectively. Psychology is basically an empirically-based humanities, getting its start in Epistemology, the term coined for the philosophy regarding the nature of the mind.

I have plenty of "old school" professors, and have never discussed Freud beyond an historical perspective. It sounds to me that you wanted to please your premed colleagues or fragile self-concept by having a degree that said, "chemical engineering" rather than "psychology". To each his own.

 

[PianoGirl04]

Well, I think the choice of a major eventually comes down to what interests you most. IMHO, psych is far, far more interesting than physics. And I don't think adcoms look down on psych. It's an empirically-based social science, one that's just as respectable as something like economics or sociology. And I agree with those of us who said that psych is something you can use for the rest of your life. It helps you to understand people's motives and behaviors, even if you can never predict what a person will do in a given situation.

Anyway, if you can't choose, go with a double major (or major and minor), as Crystal said. That's what I did as well (bio and psych).

 

[ZanMD]

I'll probably end up going with psych, as that has a greater draw for me. Physics is more of a challenge for me, but since I don't have a desire to pursue a career in physics beyond being an armchair professor, psych is the way to go.

 

[AthanasiusJam]

There seems to be a lot of people who are leaning towards psych so let me be the one to swing the pendulum back.

Totally go with physics...and here's why:

It looks like a hard major, but if you can handle the concepts that physics teaches you (and you seem like the type who could) the course load is actually quite easy. In my school, the physics teachers assign homework that isn't graded, attendance is never taken, and you don't have to go to class because you can just teach yourself from the book because the teachers all go from the book. Sure the stuff is hard BUT IT'S HARD FOR EVERYONE IN THE CLASS.

Even if homework is graded, there isn't a large assortment of physcis texts out there, so you can just go online to some other university's website to download the homework solutions. I don't personally cheat but I know others who do (and really I just added this as a joke, if you have to cheat to be a competitive premed I think you're pretty lame).

Specifically for premedders, here is this info: I have heard from several sources that adcoms don't usually look for research from physics majors because supposedly that makes one look too much like a socially-handicapped nerd which as we know adcoms try to keep out of med school (I did it anyway against my advisor's advice but only because I can't ignore my true calling

🙄 ).

Also, to rehash a point made above, I feel that premed physics majors get too much credit for a major that in my humble opinion does not require a lot of library time. (I know I am going to get a lot of hell for this from any other physics majors on this board but that's why they call these discussion boards.)

 

[NRAI2001]

How do adcomms look at double majoring? I only have to take about 3 more upper div classes and I can double major or I can take classes that I am more interested in. Does having a double major make you standout or make u anymore competitive?

 

[PianoGirl04]

Originally posted by NRAI2001
How do adcomms look at double majoring? I only have to take about 3 more upper div classes and I can double major or I can take classes that I am more interested in. Does having a double major make you standout or make u anymore competitive?

I don't think double majoring makes much of a difference...I guess if you do very well in both majors, it's a plus.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by PianoGirl04
It's an empirically-based social science, one that's just as respectable as something like economics or sociology.

Scott's scale of Social Science Respectability:

Econ > Psych > Soc

This is a very slanted playing field. Econ is quantitative, econ is based solely on the events of the actual world, and econ is among the most competitive fields that exist. There is a Nobel Prize for economics, but none for psych or sociology.

Psych has some branches that draw from or are based on "hard" or quantitative science; namely cog sci, behavioral science, and biopsychology/neurology. Sociology is hughly subjective and qualitative in nature.

The psych class I took last summer consisted of having to sit quietly while my blood boiled at the subjective BS rhetoric that my teacher was preaching. An example was the claim that there is nothing about being males that makes them biologically predisposed to aggression, the result is purely from social conditioning (and I suppose that explains "Roid Rage", and why doctors prescribe pathologically passive women testosterone... 🙄 )

I'm sorry, but I think that psych is very limited in what it can do to help you for the rest of your life, because most of the time, all it does is create a great supply of jargon to help you obfuscate simple ideas. The character building that comes from a ****ty job will probably do more. A friend of mine tried to talk about how her degree lead her to be able to 'analyze' social structure, but it really only seemed to result in asking more questions than she knew how to answer.

The biggest difference between physics and psych is that you can BS your way through psych, but you can't BS your way through physics. It's a major problem in most of the humanaties as well--the good grades do not go necessarily to the smartest or the hardest workers, but to the best BS salesmen and the brown nosers. Physics is at least a bit more honest.

Originally posted by JKDMed
It sounds to me that you wanted to please your premed colleagues or fragile self-concept by having a degree that said, "chemical engineering" rather than "psychology".

Glad that you were able to take that out of what I said...

Originally posted by Nutmeg
I'm pursuing two degrees; a BS in chemical engineering to get that respect that my fragile sense of self requires...

...but your interpretation was my interpretation first.

 

[OnMyWayThere]

I have been in your shoes... and I need to impress adcomms due to a bad past. I have asked many professionals about whether to choose a major that looks hard... the majority said stick with Psych. Dude, you're gonna be a doctor. How in the heck is Physics (other than the Physics required) going to help you?? Psychology is a big aspect of medicine. People get sick due to stress. Adcomms like Psych majors. Do not be fooled into a major to impress anybody, there is no easy way out - and adcomms know that. Do you think it's easy to get a degree in Psych? Yeah right! All these labs, stats, brain & behavior, etc. It's not easy - yet it will be usefull.

GO PSYCH and ENJOY IT!

j

 

[chaeymaey]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
I was once majoring in psych. Then one day I saw a coworker tapping the lid of his soda can, so that it would explode when he opened it. So I started telling him tat the onlyt point in tapping the lid is taht it forces you to wait for the CO2 to be reabsorbed. Then I started explaing the breakdown of carbonic acid into water and CO2, and that the process waas reversible, and by L'Chaterlier's principle the pressure would force the reaction back... and he said, "Dude... Why are you majoring in psychology?" It was at that moment I realized no one would ever respect my degree at all if I majored in psych.

I went through the same thing. I'm double majoring English and Bio and I used plant hormones when I was analyzing a poem about daisies.

 

[Brickhouse]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
The biggest difference between physics and psych is that you can BS your way through psych, but you can't BS your way through physics. It's a major problem in most of the humanaties as well--the good grades do not go necessarily to the smartest or the hardest workers, but to the best BS salesmen and the brown nosers. Physics is at least a bit more honest.

Were it not for the narrow-minded, the forward-thinkers would be indistinguishable.

I was a sociology major at UCLA, graduated summa cum laude, did an honors thesis, had the best time in college, and now I'm preparing for two med school interviews. So what if they're not at Harvard. I'm going to be an awesome, sympathetic, competent, well-rounded doctor.

Can physics explain the Holocaust?

Maybe one day human behavior will be explained away with quarks and neutrinos. I hope I'm dead by then.

 

[OnMyWayThere]

Hey the narrow minded will have a narrow life... cheers to you my fellow social science major!

 

[ZanMD]

OK this isn't a battle of majors here. Each one has it's value, and it's place in society. Physics would be a great field if I were going into radiology physics, but I'm not. I know I could excel in physics, but psychology is my first love. I like the mystery of the undiscovered country of the mind. If I went physics, I'd go PHD, otherwise I'd be selling myself short.

So psych it is. As far as Econ, that's great if you're going for an administrative track- I'd even suggested the MD/MBA combo program. But otherwise, irrelavant to the core function of a doctor- can easily be supplimented by minoring in business if you are concerned about the day to day aspects of the business side of a practice. That's my 2cents

 

[Brickhouse]

Originally posted by RPW
Anybody else notice how weird physics majors are or is it just me?

LOL!

Hey ZanMD - if your love is psych then what was your hesitation? I honestly think that your undergrad degree has less to do with what you do for a living than you think, and any major is fine, as long as you do well, and as long as you can handle the science stuff too. My friend who went to USC and now does his residency at Cedars Sinai in Los Angeles majored in Chinese. Go figure.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by OnMyWayThere
Hey the narrow minded will have a narrow life... cheers to you my fellow social science major!

WTF? Narrowness is a lack of breadth. Your major says very little about how much breadth you have. The requirements for a BA include a proscribed amount of breadth, the major only contributes depth. The way to pursue breadth is to a) take classes that aren't required, b) double major, or minor, in vastly different fields, or c) have interests outside of your curricular work that contribute breadth. By the time I finsh my 8 years of undergraduate work next spring, I'll have completed more than 240 semester units. I have more humanities and social science than I can apply to my degree, and I'll have all the cultural breadth of a BA combined with the scientific breadth of a BS. I also read widely, watch a good range of films from different genres, frequent art museums and galleries, seek out new types of food, travel whenever possible, and I've worked in a range of job functions that will only expand with time.

Narrow life my @$$. Your education is what you put into it. The major is largely irrelevant if you plan on medschool, but I for one place a great deal of value on the undergraduate education that is soon to be vastly overshadowed by my professional education.

Cheers.

 

[Brickhouse]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
WTF? Narrowness is a lack of breadth. Your major says very little about how much breadth you have.

Woah, slow down! Narrowness in this sense is referring to the individual who thinks that one major is superior to another, not to the quality of the major itself.

Or were you just being ironic?

 

[DD214_DOC]

The science majors have always given the humanities majors a bad time and vice versa. Being exposed to both schools, from both the premed classes and my short time as a chemistry major, I found that the humanities professors seemed to have a clue about the world, able to communicate better, and actually knew how to write with correct grammar! The science professors may have had an intimate understanding of things that seem more "complex" and "intellectual", but just because something requires calculus doesn't mean its superior to something that doesn't. Ask a chemistry professor about something other than chemistry and his mind goes blank.

Someone with a background in, say, psychology is much more functional in the world than someone with a background in chemistry. College majors can be divided into 3 categories, with some majors spanning different categories:

Skill-acquiring
Majors such as music, dance, theater, English, foreign languages, or other fine arts produce students who graduate with a high-level of SKILL in something, such as painting or playing a musical instrument.

Knowledge-Acquiring
Majors such as biology, chemistry, anthropology, and physics more or less contribute to a person's base of knowledge. They know a lot about stuff, but none of it is very useful unless they intend to enter graduate school and research or teach.

Applied
Majors such as psychology teach the student skills that can be applied throughout his entire life.

If I'm gonna spend the money for undergrad, but then go to med school, I'm gonna choose from A or C.

On a final note, I also think that basing your opinion of an entire field because of ONE crappy psych professor isn't smart. Take some higher-level psychology courses. I never realized how applicable this stuff really is until after a year or two, when I began to see things differently because of my education.

 

[superdevil]

Can physics explain the Holocaust?

i don't understand what this proves. can psychology explain how the sun's fusion brings our planet heat? i'm gonna doubt it.

one thing i have seen is that its easier to get a good GPA as a psych major than physics, so it really depends on what the individual wants out of their college experience. i know a guy who was a bio major but wasn't getting good grades, so he switched to psych during his sophomore year, graduated with a 3.5 and got into med school (with a 25 MCAT, no less- but his daddy went there, too 😡 ). do you think he could have brought up his GPA by switching to physics? i'm pretty sure the phys dept would have handed him his ass in no time flat.

a common defense to this point is the "oh yeah, well there are hard psych classes, too!" of course there are, there are at least SOME hard classes in ANY major, but physics is way more difficult on average, though.

what keeps me more toward my major (bio) is that you can prove things DEFINITIVELY. no questions. in psych, the best you can hope for is a set of explanations that state why a *tendency* is observed in some people (even if its 99%), and why it isn't observed in others (even if its only 1%).

lastly, as a credit to psych research (and a major annoyance, in my opinion) is that you mainly deal with observing the behavioral characteristics of people, and as we all know, people suck! 😀 they can act/react any way they damn well please, and can even delibrately misrepresent themselves. i've never seen a cell culture plate that said, "i know it *looked* like i was expressing protein X, but i really wasn't. i didn't even take up that pathetic plasmid you gave me! it was all just a game! hahahahaha!!!!"
of course, i've never seen a culture plate talk before, either...

 

[Brickhouse]

Originally posted by superdevil
i don't understand what this proves. can psychology explain how the sun's fusion brings our planet heat? i'm gonna doubt it. ..
lastly, as a credit to psych research (and a major annoyance, in my opinion) is that you mainly deal with observing the behavioral characteristics of people, and as we all know, people suck! 😀 they can act/react any way they damn well please, and can even delibrately misrepresent themselves. i've never seen a cell culture plate that said, "i know it *looked* like i was expressing protein X, but i really wasn't. i didn't even take up that pathetic plasmid you gave me! it was all just a game! hahahahaha!!!!"
of course, i've never seen a culture plate talk before, either...

My point in comment #1 is that there is relevance to social sciences, as previous social science major basher was ignoring. OK?
Secondly, LOL at culture plate analogy!

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by Brickhouse
Woah, slow down! Narrowness in this sense is referring to the individual who thinks that one major is superior to another, not to the quality of the major itself.

Or were you just being ironic?

I never said physics was superior to psych. I said that 1) psych has some lame teachers with agendas, (whereas the lame teacher in physics genarally do not have a forced agenda), 2) psych will not be as respected by the general public, 3) physics is more honest, and 4) psych will not necessarily make you more aware of what's going on in the world around you than physics will, and either will do less than working a ****ty job will.

None of this says it's "better" in any objective sense. If you like being able to BS your way to a passing grade, then that's just super. If you posses the mental acumen to bring a greater understanding to the curriculum than the mere sermon some of your teachers will provide, then that's super too.

I chose not to major in psych because I wanted a degree that people would constantly belittle (much as I'm doing right now), and I later came to feel greatly vindicated when one of my future psych classes proved to be the BIGGEST WASTE OF TIME OF MY ACADEMIC CAREER, as I cannot abide the lecturn being used as a pulpit. (That's for SDN!😉 )

 

[Brickhouse]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
If you like being able to BS your way to a passing grade, then that's just super. If you posses the mental acumen to bring a greater understanding to the curriculum than the mere sermon some of your teachers will provide, then that's super too.

What if you want to do both? 😀

If you hang around people who belittle your major, I would try to meet some new people.

 

[DD214_DOC]

For the record, my current physics professor thinks a lot about psychology. In fact, he studies it in his spare time.

He once told me why, and he said pretty much what I told you. It's one of the few really generally useful disciplines.

Also, this "BS" your way through is a bunch of ****. We take exams just like a physics major does. We have right and wrong answers. I have yet to find these hokey-pokey "We love Freud" classes you're scolding.

 

[Eraserhead]

I did psychology and I get alot of the "so, you took the easy way out" bullcrap. No one is going to judge you though, in the end, in terms of getting into med school or not. Just choose what inspires and motivates you and go with it. I did it because I wanted to be a psychologist, if I were pre-med 6 years ago I would have done neurobiology or something more substantial. Psychology does become fluffy and repetitive with time and if you don't truly believe in it you will get bored and look for other classes to take... and you have to make it tough at most schools because the requirements and grading scale are not very tough at all in general. I did the honors program and took alot of tough small group discussion classes with helped me (well is helping me) with proving to med schools that I had a good education I think.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by JKDMed
For the record, my current physics professor thinks a lot about psychology. In fact, he studies it in his spare time.

Originally posted by JKDMed
Ask a chemistry professor about something other than chemistry and his mind goes blank.

Nice. So, was this a great big act of hypocrisy, or are you suggesting that physics profs are superior to chem profs?

 

[NRAI2001]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
Nice. So, was this a great big act of hypocrisy, or are you suggesting that physics profs are superior to chem profs?

Dude go get a girlfriend, find something better to do.

 

[indo]

Can physics explain the Holocaust?

Can anyone explain the holocaust? well, except for the people who say it never happened.

 

[BerkeleyPremed]

Originally posted by NRAI2001
Dude go get a girlfriend, find something better to do.

lol...

I actually agree with Nutmeg here though. The psychology major does have lots of fluff/mickey mouse courses which really are not that difficult at all. Psychology IS a field you can BS your way through because there is a lack of "right and wrong" in those essays and papers that are assigned. Am I talking about cognitive neuroscience (offered as an upper div pysch class here)? NO..I'm talking about the other psychology classes..such as social pyschology, any class that studies Freud, Organizational Behavior, and practically all other psych classes that do not depend on neurobiology or physiology to lend credibility to the field. If the psych course is related to neurobiology or physiology..it will usually have multiple choice exams (or fill-in questions) which will..of course..only have 1 right answer. But many of the social psych classes are pure BS because the students are assigned papers in which they "analyze" a particular phenomenon..these papers are then subjectively graded and are usually given at least a B (due to grade inflation).

The last sentence you just read is basically the profile of any humanities class at any university (you're assigned papers in which you are asked to "analyze" and/or make a scholarly argument...you may or may not be asked to try to justify your assertions using outside sources...). These courses are definitely EASIER than physical science courses, engineering courses, and life science courses specifically because they lack a quantitative method of deriving the correct answer (in the case of the life sciences...you can't "derive" the correct answer to a biology question..you either know it or you don't..it's a binary system).

There is a reason why people call sociology, psychology, ethnic studies, political science, and **insert humanities major here** BS/joke majors. It's because those majors don't require their students to slave away in 5 hour long O-chem labs..those majors don't have lab practicals that are 8 hours/week...those majors don't require students to solve multi-step problems in under a minute. The social "sciences" usually just have 3 hours of lecture per week..and a "discussion" section where the TA/graduate student spoonfeeds the material back to the undergraduates. Majors like Ethnic Studies might as well hand out diapers to the undergrads because of all the spoonfeeding...the students in it get away with doing little to no work and cruise with straight As.

That being said...I do agree that different fields are hard for different people and everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. (I.e...someone who sconsistently gets As in chemistry and physics might think that writing a persuasive essay is difficult). However..I do think certain majors offer easier courses overall..and based on comparitive GPA data between majors..it seems like the humanities/social "sciences" do gets LOTS of grade inflation.

 

[DD214_DOC]

I think you guys just need to get a clue. I'm not going to waste any more time arguing about this because, ironically, I already know what is going to happen and what your responses would most likely be. I also know why the arguing would be futile in my case, because it's only going to cause you to dig up more of your own thoughts to defend yourselves, thus reinforcing your current (and ignorant) beliefs. I know this because I'm a psychology major.

I didn't like being a science major because ALL I DID was memorize facts or formulas and regurgitate material for an exam. At least in psych I get to write papers using applied knowledge and some of my own ideas and theories, although I have to SUPPORT myself with evidence. Isn't really any surprise I will probably do better on the verbal section than a vast majority of the science majors? Nope.

Luckily, if I ever forget an equation, though, I'll be sure to ask one of you science majors.

On a final note, what are you going to do if you ever get a suicidal or homicidal patient in the ED who unconceals a gun or knife and sticks it to his or your head or throat? Talk him out of it with physics problems or an explanation of the translational and rotational energy of a wheel rolling down a hill?

 

[NRAI2001]

If the psych course is related to neurobiology or physiology..it will usually have multiple choice exams (or fill-in questions) which will..of course..only have 1 right answer.

I have taken a few psych courses and they were all bio related so it was kinda hard to BS in those classes, but I guess your right other psych classes (social psych, etc) are probably a lot of bs. Still society needs psychologists just as much as they need physicists and chemists. All fields require different skills, where physics may require more mathematical thought, psychology requires more conceptual thought.

 

[NRAI2001]

Therefore each field is difficult in its own sense.

 

[Brickhouse]

This topic is getting a little tiresome....

And yet I can't get enough of it!

Because something has no "right or wrong" answer, does that presuppose it's easy? I would argue to the contrary. I would also argue that's it is more characteristic of real life.

I'd be afraid to have a doctor who thought all social sciences were BS. I don't think s/he'd have any hope of understanding my needs. I would feel completely alienated from that person. And I don't think I'm the only one.

 

[ZanMD]

psychology deals with interaction, something you will use a lot as a doctor. How often as a doctor will I use physics knowledge? Rarely to nada. Taking physics when your going into medicine is solely for bragging rights, so therefore not the path I wish to follow.

And I would point out that even if you're a psych major, you still have to complete the prereqs, like physics, biology, chem, and caluculus for some. So There IS challenge involved in this path.

 

[Super Rob]

If I took a time machine back to my sophomore year of college, I would major in something that could get me a job when I graduated.

Psychology and physics are great. If you have STRONG research interests and STRONG grades backing you, you should go for whichever one offers you the most opportunities to get paid to do research.

But if you are not going for a doctorate in psychology (or presumably a doctorate in physics), the undergraduate degree is almost useless (from a job perspective).

Do what's best for yourself, not what's best for your application. If the ad coms reject you, you'll be stuck with whatever degree you earned.

On a positive note, if you like what you study and it can lead to a job, AND you have the prereqs to get into med school... it's win win.

 

[Nutmeg]

The part about this thread that really pisses me off is that I made some complaints about the curriculum, the public's preconcieved notions, and the professors, and the pro-psych crew returns fire with:

Were it not for the narrow-minded, the forward-thinkers would be indistinguishable.

Anybody else notice how weird physics majors are or is it just me?

Ask a chemistry professor about something other than chemistry and his mind goes blank.

Jebus! Is that really what psych does for you?

My big problem with psych majors is that they think that studying books is a good way to learn about people. Physicists do physics labs, biologists do bio labs, etc., but the simple truth is that a) human subjects open up a mess of issues and thus it is not easy for a psych major to get any real scientific experience, and b) clinical experience in psychology is as irrelevant to daily life as physics or bio is. The average bartender, hustler, or cop has a far better understanding of the way people work and operate in real situations than the psych major does. The idea that anyone would be arrogant enough to imply that their undergrad psych degree would bring them to understand something as enormous and as heinous as the holocaust? Criminey! Talk about your ego trips! Moreover, if I were looking for perspectives on the cause of the holocaust, I'd sooner ask a history major.

Biologists understand evolution, which is nothing short of being the process which created the human mind. I personally feel that my understanding of evolution had provided far more understanding of the human mind than psych did, even when my psych classes outnumbered my bio classes.

Anybody who only "memorized facts" in their science classes should chalk that up to a personal failure to recognize that biology, chemistry, and physics are governed by comprehesible concepts. My psych classes have all been based largely on the scores acquired in multiple choice memorization tests taken with a gd scantron. My science classes have been based on comprehension and analysis, and putting the scientific method to work. All of these things have been useful in my life, from treating a chemical burn, to understanding nutrition, to problem solving in panic situations, and above all, in finding a job.

My biggest beef with psych is that it's a subject that, as Will Hunting puts it, could've been acheived with a buck fifty in late charges at the local library. I think that psychology is absolutely the most fascinating subject that there is to study, but unlike the sciences that are based in labs that I could never afford to do on my own, psychology is something that I personally feel is better studied on your own through independant reading and exposure to real people in real situations.

 

[DD214_DOC]

What do you think research labs in psychology are for? Or Field studies/observations? Or case studies? All of these supply more data to the pool we draw conclusions from.

Once again, you're wrong and completely ignorant.

 

[superdevil]

On a final note, what are you going to do if you ever get a suicidal or homicidal patient in the ED who unconceals a gun or knife and sticks it to his or your head or throat? Talk him out of it with physics problems or an explanation of the translational and rotational energy of a wheel rolling down a hill?

this is pretty unfair. i think it has more to do with the kind of person you are than what you ugrad major was. i know of a couple of psych majors who would **** their pants when confronted by a knife-wielding homicidal maniac.

I also know why the arguing would be futile in my case, because it's only going to cause you to dig up more of your own thoughts to defend yourselves, thus reinforcing your current (and ignorant) beliefs. I know this because I'm a psychology major.

boy, somebody sure likes himself....what's the weather like up on that pedestal??

Once again, you're wrong and completely ignorant.

wait a minute, JKDMed, i thought you were going to stop wasting your time on this thread? perhaps doing your church-lady-style superiority dance is just too tempting. 😀

seriously, if you are the master of human nature and psychology that you seem to be, couldn't you have presented your points with at least some semblance of tact and thought to coax the "other side" to see what you want them to see? condescending comments typically aren't met with an open mind. you should know that, because you are a psychology major!

 

[PianoGirl04]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
...psychology is something that I personally feel is better studied on your own through independant reading and exposure to real people in real situations.

Well, as for independent reading...what you are reading IS based on experimental studies. When psych textbooks describe phenomena, they often don't highlight the fact that these theories developed out of individual experiments. I still maintain that psychology is an experimental science, not a pseudo-science or what Good Will Hunting said. Those late charges are for books that were made possible by laboratory studies!

You have a very valid point in regard to real people and real situations. This is the problem of ecological validity...a lot of studies that have been done throughout the history of psychology may not generalize to people who are not middle-class white college students. And the lab is not exactly the same as the situations we face every day...there's no real interaction or relationships with other people, the tasks in labs are usually artificial, etc. These are problem that researchers are still wrestling with and may never solve. That's the ever-present tradeoff between being able to manipulate/control variables and being able to observe a behavior naturally.

 

[Brickhouse]

Originally posted by Nutmeg

The idea that anyone would be arrogant enough to imply that their undergrad psych degree would bring them to understand something as enormous and as heinous as the holocaust? . [/B]

Nutmeg, having studied Durkheim, Marx, Weber, Bordieu....I would say it is not arrogant to state that social science (not psych particularly) brings about a better understanding of the human behavior that lead to events in history like genocide than , let's say....physics. It's just a fact. They each have their place in our curriculum. That's really more my point than to offend.
That's what we do in the social sciences....we try to understand the heinous so that it might not be repeated. And personally, I think that makes it a family of a majors worth pursuing, don't you?

Peace, I'm unsubscribing to this thread, ZanMD, OP, good luck with your major. 😉

 

[BerkeleyPremed]

Originally posted by Brickhouse
This topic is getting a little tiresome....

And yet I can't get enough of it!

Because something has no "right or wrong" answer, does that presuppose it's easy? I would argue to the contrary. I would also argue that's it is more characteristic of real life.

I'd be afraid to have a doctor who thought all social sciences were BS. I don't think s/he'd have any hope of understanding my needs. I would feel completely alienated from that person. And I don't think I'm the only one.

If something doesn't have a clear "right or wrong" answer...that means that there is room to BS. This is why scientists try to avoid qualitative analysis whenever possible (because qualitative analysis is SUBJECTIVE and one scientist's interpretation can differ radically from another scientist's interpretation). To avoid this problem...scientists quantify all of their results from their experiments (charts, graphs, histograms, etc).

I don't think ALL social sciences are complete BS...just social psychology (the neuroscience aspect of psychology is only legitimate/credible because it has its foundations in neurobiology, neural physiology, etc...sub-disciplines of biology). I think economics is probably the most respected and difficult of the social sciences (because it's the most quantiative)...and I think economics is a very legitimate field. In fact... John Nash (a MATHEMATICIAN) from Princeton won the Nobel Prize for economics. I just think certain majors just offer easier/fluffier classes than others (which can be shown by comparitive GPA stats between majors)..as a result, I think certain degrees are just more legitimate than others.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by PianoGirl04
Well, as for independent reading...what you are reading IS based on experimental studies. When psych textbooks describe phenomena, they often don't highlight the fact that these theories developed out of individual experiments. I still maintain that psychology is an experimental science, not a pseudo-science or what Good Will Hunting said. Those late charges are for books that were made possible by laboratory studies!

If we were talking about PhD's, then fine. I have utter respect for the PhD's in psychology that I've known. PhD are the ones who write the books in the library, not undergrad psych majors. My problem is not with psych as a discipline, but psych as it exists today. And these chumps who try to pretend that they have a better understanding of how to talk a homicidal maniac back onto his rocker... come ON! When do you get to the psych class that talks about the importance of realizing that you are not qualified to diagnose or treat because you have an undergrad psych degree?

My prof for Psychology of Abnormal behavior had a PhD from UCLA. She was nothing short of a genius, IMHO. But that comes from the many things beyond the undergrad curriculum that she had to do as a grad student, like work for prolonged periods of time using behavior reinforcement to teach autistic children to look at people by shoving raisins in their mouth, or by teaching courses.

But undergrads? I don't need to draw up any anecdotal evidence, I'll just refer to superdevil's insight about JKDMed. 'Nuff said.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by Brickhouse
Nutmeg, having studied Durkheim, Marx, Weber, Bordieu....

Marx wanted to stop the oppression of the proletariat (sp?)masses by the bourgeoisie (sp?). Result? 50 million killed by Stalin in the name of Marxism, and I don't know the number for China, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and that's what happens when these overblown subjective ideologies outgrow their britches.

Admittedly, physics has played it's own role in creating disaster and death, but I'm not trying to sell physics as some end-all be-all panacea.

 

[Bones2008]

Okay, here's my two cents:

I think Jimmy John's has great advertising one-liners. For example, "Have you ever listened to your butt?" has got to be one of the most eye-catching things I've ever read on a menu. It definitely sticks in your mind. What I also like about Jimmy John's is that their sandwiches are the perfect size for lunch. Subway's six-incher seems to short and the footlong is more appropriate for dinner. However, Jimmy John's cannot match Subway's topping selection, which is simply unparalleled in the fastfood sandwich industry.

My favorite JJ's sandwich is the Beach Club (turkey and avocado, YUM). For Subway I've gotta go with the chicken teriyaki. Healthy and great-tasting...how can you go wrong?

What do y'all think about Jimmy John's and Subway?