The discussion revolves around the question of whether individuals should pursue careers based on their skills or their happiness, particularly contrasting fields in the humanities with those in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics). Participants explore the implications of GPA as a measure of skill and the perceived difficulty of various academic disciplines.
Participants express differing views on the relationship between GPA, skill, and career viability, with no clear consensus on whether one should prioritize skill or happiness in career choices. The debate on the relative difficulty of STEM versus humanities remains unresolved.
Limitations include the subjective nature of personal experiences shared by participants, which may not be generalizable. The discussion also reflects varying definitions of skill and success across different fields.
yoron said:Thanks Niflheim, but I doubt we all can burn in that way, it depends on what you mean by it naturally? Making your life a statement, or just going your own way? I was more thinking of the pursuit of happiness in general. :) Somewhat selfish that one I admit, but from a personal point of view incredibly important.
DaleSpam said:Generally people enjoy things that they are skilled at, so I am not sure that the distinction makes a lot of sense. That said, any given person typically has multiple skills and multiple passions. Some of those will be more marketable than others, so it is worthwhile to think about the different options available and how to make the best individual tradeoff between the various skills and attitudes that you have.
koneko369 said:Well, I would say that it is better to be happy doing what you love, I do see that most people here already have a career related to science, in my case, I am the total opposite to you, I used to think that I wanted to be a journalist or a movie director or something related to art but a year ago I found out that my passion is physics, I know it is hard but whatever, also I am from Costa Rica and science is not a priority here. This sounds stupid and cliché but you should follow your heart.
DaleSpam said:Generally people enjoy things that they are skilled at, so I am not sure that the distinction makes a lot of sense. That said, any given person typically has multiple skills and multiple passions. Some of those will be more marketable than others, so it is worthwhile to think about the different options available and how to make the best individual tradeoff between the various skills and attitudes that you have.
Whether you call them passions or interests, most people that I know have more than one. The few that don't are rather dysfunctional and unhappy.Crichigo said:You are wrong when you say that people have multiple passions.
The people who interview you for a job will often want to know "What is your passion"; and they mean ONE. This is used for forcing you to either be the right candidate or the wrong one. Giving more than ONE PASSION means you will be rejected since the interviewer cannot be sure that either is a true passion.DaleSpam said:Whether you call them passions or interests, most people that I know have more than one. The few that don't are rather dysfunctional and unhappy.
In any case, if you choose to classify them as interests rather than passions the point remains that you can use any of them to form a satisfying career, not just the "top" one. Blindly pigeonholing yourself into one is a bad idea economically, professionally, and personally.
This is a really bad interview question on several levels. If it is asked then it means that the HR department did a poor job training the hiring manager.symbolipoint said:The people who interview you for a job will often want to know "What is your passion"; and they mean ONE. This is used for forcing you to either be the right candidate or the wrong one. Giving more than ONE PASSION means you will be rejected since the interviewer cannot be sure than either is a true passion.