Do you think the reason STEM-gifted people usually suck at Humanities fields (and vice versa) is due to different methods of processing information in the brain?
I'm someone who naturally sucks at most Science related courses?especially Chemistry and Physics?and I've been wondering why this is. And what I've realized is I fail to grasp abstract concepts unless they're rooted in something very tangible and concrete. For Math this is okay because numbers are very simple and intuitive, I've been using them since childhood and everything connects back to their properties so it feels 100% grounded. But with most natural sciences you're simply given an abstract concept and can only know it through its relation to other abstract concepts. This is touched upon by Feynman in this interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8
Basically, what makes a good physicist or chemist is their ability to make elaborate, abstract, useful conceptions in their head with little to no direct connection to the material world and use those abstractions as a base to understand new concepts. I find anatomy very hard because that style of thinking is very important, and you can't understand how the body works without it. But I can't properly learn it unless I can relate it to something concrete, which is very hard.
Have you guys ever thought about this? Do you get what I mean?
I'm someone who naturally sucks at most Science related courses?especially Chemistry and Physics?and I've been wondering why this is. And what I've realized is I fail to grasp abstract concepts unless they're rooted in something very tangible and concrete. For Math this is okay because numbers are very simple and intuitive, I've been using them since childhood and everything connects back to their properties so it feels 100% grounded. But with most natural sciences you're simply given an abstract concept and can only know it through its relation to other abstract concepts. This is touched upon by Feynman in this interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8
Basically, what makes a good physicist or chemist is their ability to make elaborate, abstract, useful conceptions in their head with little to no direct connection to the material world and use those abstractions as a base to understand new concepts. I find anatomy very hard because that style of thinking is very important, and you can't understand how the body works without it. But I can't properly learn it unless I can relate it to something concrete, which is very hard.
Have you guys ever thought about this? Do you get what I mean?
