- #36
JasonRox
Homework Helper
Gold Member
- 2,386
- 4
ice109 said:if it didn't challenge you, your phd, why did you do it?
He's talking about something different.
ice109 said:if it didn't challenge you, your phd, why did you do it?
JasonRox said:He's talking about something different.
JasonRox said:What the hell are you talking about?
You can love the stuff and still not be efficiently studying. You can love the stuff and still get bored studying it. That's just the way it is. What does materialism have anything to do with it? I have absolutely no idea. I know materialistic people who can study without any problems.
If you want to be efficient about studying, it's all about practicing. Keep studying. Try something new. It's just like working out or jogging. You have to practice and practice and eventually you'll get better.
Passion and love can only take you so far. You have to do the rest of the work yourself. It won't just happen naturally, so I have no idea where you got this from.
jostpuur said:That was slightly too provocative. Pivoxa15 of course had a point there.
My problem is certainly not a materialistic attitude in studying. I am genuinely interested in mathematics and physics. In mathematics my problem is that it is difficult to remain motivated, when I don't understand the benefits of some definitions or theorems. In physics my problem is that the explanations are too confusing for me to understand, and I am not convinced that it is always my own fault.
So my question was meant to mean, that how can you remain motivated, when obstacles such as these start to come on the way.
JasonRox said:Loving it isn't going to help under the purpose of a theorem any better. Loving it isn't going to help you understand the explanations in physics.
Like I said, it has very little to do with love or passion to study efficiently.
Also, like I said, it's like jogging. You can hate jogging more than anything in the world, but if you jog everyday, you'll get better just because. Same thing with studying.
Not being stressed about something is not the same as it not being a challenge.ice109 said:if it didn't challenge you, your phd, why did you do it?
in my undergrad i spent a min of 12 hrs a day at the librry studying all subjects each and every day.
Sojourner01 said:I would have called that a borderline case of obsessive-compulsive disorder. If you were a friend of mine I would have urged you to a psychiatrist.
Werg22 said:If that's what it takes for you to get a C, you are studying in fundamentally flawed way.
Werg22 said:If that's what it takes for you to get a C, you are studying in fundamentally flawed way.
ice109 said:i think he's exaggerating. no one could possibly study 12 hours a day and get a C. i can't imagine anything that doesn't become transparent after a couple of hours, let alone half a day.
JasonRox said:If you're studying 3 hours or more a day and still only crack a C, you're not really that cut out for it.
ice109 said:i think that's a really silly statement
cristo said:I think it's quite realistic. Three hours study every day, on top of attending classes, is a large amount of study. Doing this amount of work for an entire year, and still only managing to scape mediocre grades does seem to imply that they are either not cut out for the subject, or that they are going about studying in the incorrect way.