[292] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Workload (was: Re: Affirmative action )
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sourav K. Mandal)
Sat Apr 28 16:08:06 2001
Message-Id: <200104282007.QAA03538@dichotomy.dyn.dhs.org>
From: "Sourav K. Mandal" <Sourav.Mandal@ikaran.com>
Reply-To: "Sourav K. Mandal" <Sourav.Mandal@ikaran.com>
To: mit-talk@mit.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 16:07:23 -0400
""Hesky Fisher" <hfisher@MIT.EDU>" wrote:
> Where in the rulebook does it say that difficulty is related to quality? [...]
If there weren't such a connection, then everyone would understand
<place difficult to understand subject here>. I am course 8, and there
is often no getting around the fact that much of what we learn is quite
difficult to grasp. I don't know about other majors, but that is a
fact of life with physics at MIT. If you're smart, the work's easy and
fast; if not, it'll be enormously difficult and time-consuming.
Obviously, there is a sliding scale in between ...
That being said, I'm always annoyed by people who believe in the false
choice between working hard and relaxing/sleeping/eating, when they are
so obviously not seizing their potential. I don't think all MIT
students have reached the point of maximal healthy effort; from my
anecdotal observations, less than a third have. Once an overwhelming
fraction of the student population maxes themselves out, _then_ it
would be fair to talk about the difficulty and courseload.
Cheers,
Sourav
------------------------------------------------------------
Sourav K. Mandal
Sourav.Mandal@ikaran.com
http://www.ikaran.com/Sourav.Mandal/
