22 Comments
Manhattan poll takes calculated, er, “responsible” stance on expansion: city’s “success…difficult to absorb”. There’s always Bounty.
Mudd to get greener (does that mean less muddy, or more?)
Police rubber-stamp 11-block strike walk…
…but in opinion, we find self-conscious Iraq caution, and the same message with a lot more braggadoccio…plus, to top it all off, love is slaughtered by science. With V-Day and the aforementioned strike looming, we predict such selections will stay the course.
Loading …
22 Comments
@catfood and yes i understand that is flaming, but flaming the flamers is like shooting a rapist
@flaming? these people are quite open about having pawned their souls, dont even understand the idea of an education for its own sake… i dont think they have anything to argue with you about
@well... if i already was interested enough in science to read psychology today, i wouldnt need the bite-sized pieces in which caitlin serves up her information. however, for all intents and purposes, i am distinctly UNinterested in complicated science, which is why i filled my core requirement with surfaces and knots, and only want a simple, snuggly explanation to justify my bitterness about valentine’s day. thanks, caitlin, for giving me exactly what i need!
@ADAM SMITH Invisible hand!!!!!!
Maybe it’s for resume building but who cares?
Each to his own ends will help us all. Your ends of whining though probably doesn’t produce or amount to much.
@my issue with Shuro is that she says nothing new. You mean brain chemicals dictate my feelings? You don’t say! Anti-depressants might decrease libido? Millions of people have already figured that one out. Could love be chemical? Well, DUH. A little more insight would be nice. People generally know that romance has a chemical, sexual component. Psychology Today has some recent articles about love and flirting that were a lot more engaging, perhaps she could have done some research (they aren’t long articles). That’s my issue with the column, I don’t care why she’s writing it, I just think that she can do better.
@love is good.
@pms Yo, Tom. I’m posting on Bwog instead of doing my work, at work. So… right there with ya, buddy. As for the column, it’s funny, well-written, and if she’s doing for “future aims” then Science Times, meet Ms. Shure. As for love, there’s nothing wrong with love.
@Tom I think a lot of people write columns and such precisely because they DON’T know what they want to do with their career and are making something of their time while they’re still unsure. Then again, I’m posting on bwog instead of listening to my professor…that may be indicative of far more troubling career thoughts (or lack thereof).
@it is possible that maybe she actually likes writing the column and doesn’t have prestige particularly in mind. It IS possible.
@in which case that would be fine. but it’s depressing to see so many people on bwog who seem to be base opportunists. why a liberal arts education at all? preprofessional, vocational institutes would see to fit their interests…or even schools without the diversity of a core curriculum.
@uhhhh... caitlin was asked to write the column because she’s smart and also hilarious. she didnt go seek it out to build her resume. the real question is can anyone do anything at this school without someone else being unnecessarily critical?
@it's f’in stupid.
@hmmm I don’t think it’s supposed to be extremely funny. It’s just a title for a column….
@abba I don’t understand why Caitlin Shure writes that neuroscience article, and every week I get offended when I see the name “Neuro? Shure-o!!!!” Not fucking funny. If I had to take a stab, I imagine the column’s existence has something to do with getting into graduate school.
@opportunist does anyone do anything at this school without some future aim in mind? I’m so fucking sick of this resume building/rehearsal for prestige in later life mentality.
@umm... …welcome to the real world
@ummm not everyone in the real world is a tool.
@dude yea they are!
@why the hell are you in college if you don’t have any future aims? Vision and ambition aren’t bad things.
@the point vision and ambition are fine…but does everything we do have to be oriented toward them? can’t you enjoy, say, writing a column on books even if you’re headed for med school?
@uh yeah Of course everyone here is working towards a future goal. Otherwise, wouldn’t our money be better spent relaxing at Club Med? If I didn’t think I could use my Columbia education and experience to get a good job or into a good grad school, I would have just gone to a state/party school and fucked around for 4 years doing kegstands and taking basketweaving classes. I’m expending a lot of money and energy to be here, you’d better believe I expect some later prestige in return.
@catfood school is for learning, you bastards. not everything you do has to be channeled into a banking career. if that’s your thing, so be it, but i wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of the flamers here are the same motherfuckers who long ago pawned their souls for a “GUARANTEED $100,000 salary!!!”
let the kids have fun.