My Response: SAT Score

[quote]wfifer wrote:
Okay, if you have an issue with multiplication then maybe math isn’t for you. =P The “times tables” are a shortcut. Memorizing anything in math is a shortcut. Everything can be derived through logic. Yes, in some cases this is tantamount to reinventing the wheel, but it can be done.

Language is purely our invention. History is memorization; without the facts you can’t do any of the analysis. [/quote]

Haha, that reminds me of a something funny. We are in calculas class doing a problem, when we hit some dogshit arithmatic 13*25(to go on in the problem) or something and it holds up class for like 3 minutes while someone gets their calculator out. My teacher says chuckling “As you get better at math, and go on to more and more advanced classes, your arithmatic gets worse and worse”. lol im a dork. but it’s true.

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
wfifer wrote:
Vicomte wrote:
I think most people who are naturally intelligent suck at math. Other subjects, such as English, Biology, humanities, etc. are very intuitive. Math is systematic, but you must learn the intricate details of the system first, which takes work and study. As others have mentioned, naturally smart people grew up not having to work and study for their success, so they lack the drive/skill to do so when they have to.

I suck at math as well. Basic algebra is fucking difficult, even. Hell, I failed the easy math class my senior year. The one the stupid kids take just so they can tell their parents they took a math class. Kids with helmets on did better than I did.

For comparison purposes, Is cored 550 on the math section of the SAT. I scored 790 on the verbal section, but only because I made a stupid mistake and forgot what ‘vociferous’ meant. I knew nothing about the SAT until I sat down to take it.

Moral of the story: Math is hard for lazy smart people.

I really have to disagree with you. I’ve heard some say that the SAT math is particularly hard because they haven’t done it in a while. I’d argue that you should be able derive all necessary problem-solving methods from logic and an understanding of basic math terminology. Very little prior knowledge is needed.

On the other hand, the verbal section is based on your knowledge of obscure definitions. If you do a lot of reading this won’t be a problem, but that requires effort. I think we all know how easy it is to get through English without ever reading a book…hell, I’ve aced AP essays when I couldn’t name the protagonist.

The only difficult subject for lazy smart people is History–not enough detail in the lectures to test well.

I’ll have to disagree with you, as well. At least in reference to math and history. If very little prior knowledge was needed, I wouldn’t have been staring at my paper saying ‘How the hell do you do that, again?’ Math is all about memorizing complex algorithms. Do this, then that, then that and that, take your answer and do this and that, and you’ll get it right every time. If you haven’t put the time in to know exactly how you’re supposed to do it, and even what exactly you’re supposed to do, you will fuck it up.

As you mentioned about English essays, anyone who isn’t a moron can do that because there’s no right or wrong, exactly, and no study is required as there is no memorization. I’ve seen people who are truly atrocious writers (read:complete morons) do well in math simply because they took the time to study and learn how the math works. Obviously being intelligent helps with math as well, but simply taking the time and doing the grunt work of memorizing the steps will take you much farther, at least moreso than any other subject, even science. Logic is much more useful in Biology than Algebra.

I’ve always done very well in history without even trying. There’s enough detail in lectures if you extrapolate a bit using basic knowledge anyone who’s ever picked up a book would know. Of course, I had an AP teacher once who was so fucking stupid I had to put wrong answers on his tests so I could pass. You can’t fudge dates and the like, obviously, but the rest can be intuited rather simply with a basis of general knowledge and an able mind. Not so with maths.

Of course, I’ve been known to pick up a book now and then. But I don’t think anyone can honestly call themselves intelligent when they don’t read. It’s sort of a prerequisite. It’s the ability to apply what you’ve read and learned otherwise that makes you smart.[/quote]

x2 on every point. I could have aced both my finals all three years so far in history without ever showing up for class. But I even show up after class for math and I bombed.

but then again, I read a lot.

[quote]wushu_1984 wrote:
masonator wrote:
I’m qualified for MENSA and suck at complex math also, so don’t feel alone…

I couldn’t qualify for MENSA and suck at IQ tests but I’m doing a postgrad in complex maths, I kinda feel alone!

matko5 wrote:
Hey, I’m just wondering what is considered complex math in this discussion? Just to give me a frame point…

Anything beyond Measure theory and functional analysis gets pretty complex…

Vicomte wrote:
I think most people who are naturally intelligent suck at math. Other subjects, such as English, Biology, humanities, etc. are very intuitive. Math is systematic, but you must learn the intricate details of the system first, which takes work and study…
…anyone who isn’t a moron can do that because there’s no right or wrong…

I found English\humanities difficult to get good grades in when at school. Almost counter-intuitive. Sometimes I’d spend hours on a essay trying to make it “perfect” and then get one of the lowest marks I’d ever gotten. Other times I’d just turn in some crap that was just a first draft, not re-written or anything, done in about half an hour and get the best grade I’d ever gotten. It made no sense to me. As Vicomte says “there’s no right or wrong answer” and this confused the hell out of me because the teachers\examiners were associating grades and numbers with questions where there is no right or wrong answer.

Maths on the other hand always made sense to me. There was a right answer and the difficulty was in finding the answer and it didn’t really matter that much how you found the answer so long as the argument was logical. In a maths test your score was deduced logically based on how many answers you got out. I could always leave a math exam and have a pretty good idea on my grade. I never felt that way coming out of an English exam, my grade could be anywhere from D to A. I’d spend way more time studying English than maths to get a way worse grade!

That’s my perspective on things.[/quote]

I’m in what is esentially a college english class and I can shit out persuasive essays and all other types of papers (usually 4+ pages) in under 20 minutes with 90%+.

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
rcsermas wrote:

Math is not about memorizing complex algorithms at all. Everything in the math classes that most people have to take (algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus) is intuitively logical, and from just knowing the basics you can reason through some of the most advanced problems. Most people who don’t do well in advanced math have a very poor foundation in the subject from a young age (usually a lack of interest, sometimes poor instruction). These people then lack the capability to take the more advanced concepts and break them down to an elementary level, which, in my experience at least, is key to grasping a true understanding of them.

These ‘basics’ that you talk about are the complex algorithms. They must be memorized, as I’m sure you’ll agree. It’s not intuitively logical, it’s so coldly logical that it goes much farther beyond intuition. Language is intuitively logical. Even if you don’t know the rules exactly, you can still find your way around it. Even a foreign language. Math relies so much on precision and accuracy that it becomes unmanageable in unskilled hands. There’s no margin of error. You make one tiny mistake in the course of solving a problem and the whole thing is fucked, even if you do everything else right. It’s all hard lines and concrete geometry, there’s nothing ‘human’ about it.

Of course, I just hate the stuff. I suppose it comes down to individual inclination.[/quote]

It is intuitively logical to the people for whom it is, in the same way that some young children will sit down at a piano and plink out Happy Birthday without any prior training. For whatever reason, musical notes make intuitive sense to them and they can replicate them in patterns. At the same time, children who play by ear at a young age will not become virtuosos without motivation, discipline, and instruction. Math is the same way.

Generally speaking more intelligent people will be able to master more complex material of whatever sort than someone with the same motivation, discipline, and instruction, but less intelligence (processing power).

But drive counts as much as intelligence in the real world, I think, as long as you are reasonably bright.

Nephorm, it was very good to see a post from you!

I’ve got a good memory, and I understand quickly. Look at a concept, understand it(or have it explained), use it and remember it. That’s all there is to math.

English is so much more, just making a good point isn’t enough, but you have to forward it in the right way with a lot of bullshit to make it sound nice. In math you do calculations, many ugly and often useless, but you’ll still eventually get the right answer, and that’s all that matters.

In English you have to sugarcoat anything you write with big words that make it sound more advanced, even if you could do it faster and more comprehensive with smaller words. And then half of the time you’ll go overboard with the bullshit that’s supposed to make you look superior and it all looks condecending and you’re fucked.

History is also straight-forward, atleast if your teacher isn’t an idiot. You look up the facts and remember them. Easy. Biology is the same, but with some basic concepts you need to understand. Physics too.

Enlish is like this whole “it’s the journey, not the destination” crap. In math a wrong is a wrong. In enlish a wrong is bloody brilliant as long as you make it sound good.

[quote]shoo wrote:
I’ve got a good memory, and I understand quickly. Look at a concept, understand it(or have it explained), use it and remember it. That’s all there is to math.

English is so much more, just making a good point isn’t enough, but you have to forward it in the right way with a lot of bullshit to make it sound nice. In math you do calculations, many ugly and often useless, but you’ll still eventually get the right answer, and that’s all that matters.

In English you have to sugarcoat anything you write with big words that make it sound more advanced, even if you could do it faster and more comprehensive with smaller words. And then half of the time you’ll go overboard with the bullshit that’s supposed to make you look superior and it all looks condecending and you’re fucked.

History is also straight-forward, atleast if your teacher isn’t an idiot. You look up the facts and remember them. Easy. Biology is the same, but with some basic concepts you need to understand. Physics too.

Enlish is like this whole “it’s the journey, not the destination” crap. In math a wrong is a wrong. In enlish a wrong is bloody brilliant as long as you make it sound good.[/quote]

Agreed. In math and the sciences, right is right. English courses depend way too much on the opinion of the teacher/professor. I’ve cranked out 5 page papers in 30 minutes that I thought were absolutely terrible and gotten 100%. Then on the flip side, I’ve gotten very into certain essays before and spent hours trying to make them “perfect” and ended up barely getting a B. Writing blows.

[quote]shoo wrote:

In English you have to sugarcoat anything you write with big words that make it sound more advanced, even if you could do it faster and more comprehensive with smaller words. And then half of the time you’ll go overboard with the bullshit that’s supposed to make you look superior and it all looks condecending and you’re fucked.
[/quote]

I actually did really well with the “short and sweet” essay, at least at the AP level. Based on what I’ve heard of the SAT writing though, they look for length more than anything else. That is, I presume, why I only got a 710 or something back when it was an SAT II.

[quote]rcsermas wrote:
Agreed. In math and the sciences, right is right. English courses depend way too much on the opinion of the teacher/professor. I’ve cranked out 5 page papers in 30 minutes that I thought were absolutely terrible and gotten 100%. Then on the flip side, I’ve gotten very into certain essays before and spent hours trying to make them “perfect” and ended up barely getting a B. Writing blows.
[/quote]

x2

This is the exact same as what used always happen to me.

Funny thing though, pre-teens I was considered good at English because all you had was vocab. spelling and grammar all of which are very straight forward and pretty much logical.

Music is the sound of mathematics.