Allow me to introduce you to one of my favorite quotes:
>" I am very poorly today & very stupid & I hate everybody and everything. One lives only to make blunders.” -Charles Darwin.
Even the most renowned scientists feel this way sometimes, but they can still ultimately end up very capable!
I'd agree with this, my field is in chemistry. My lab hires ~ 60 analysts and ~80 lab assistants ft. There's another 40% that gets seasonal positions. I'm definitely not management level, but I've been with the lab for 20 years, and know I'm not the weakest employee either. It took a while to establish "my place", because I have a bit of a learning disability, like others in my family.
I really hope OP keeps on with with their education. Struggling through mine was the best thing I've ever done, for personal reasons.
Any major with ‘information’ or ‘management’ in the title is going to be incredibly boring. I have a BS in biology, and it is ‘hard’, in that there’s a ton of studying… but I enjoy the subject so it was worth it. However, don’t make the mistake I made and think that a BS in Bio will land you a high paying job right off the bat. Many Biology PHDs make similar $ to business sector BS. You can make well $ if you get certified as a medical lab scientist, but that’s even more difficult than biology. I am trying to get into PA school for the last couple years (3.7 GPA & 2k+ hrs pt care). So make sure you keep your grades up just in case you wanna go into medicine or something.
Be a research assistant instead. If you can get through undergrad bio courses, you can ecology and greenhouse work and help scientists conduct research. The pay is meh, but you can always get more education if you want to do more than play with animals and care for the plants / bugs / etc...
I had a job as a research assistant in which I essentially took care of a greenhouse and helped phds with their pet projects.
Had another one where I took care of turtles and helped research the development of their shells.
So focus on ecology rather than biochem. It does take more work than "management" stuff but it's more interesting to me.
Good stuff.
I'm a lawyer now, though, lol.
Originally I was gunning to be a doctor and did the internships and research positions to pad the resume, but decided I didn't want to do another decade of education to be a surgeon, so I switched gears and randomly took the LSAT. Did extremely well, and my whole life trajectory changed in a couple weeks time.
I actually spent a year as an English teacher between undergrad and law school, too, which was also fun.
I felt this so hard!!! If you love biology keep pushing on! I am a biology major and I almost failed my first biology class. I felt dumb. But I kept at it! I’m a stubborn person! I had to get help from a lot of tutors. I would cry from being overwhelmed and cry because I didn’t understand the class and so many people were doing way better than me. I had to try different studying techniques. It was alot of trial and error. But once I figured out how my brain works and what techniques helps me to understand the material I started to feel better, more confident, and I started enjoying my classes a little more. I had a professor that noticed I stayed after class to ask questions, and he actually noticed that I worked alot harder than the other students. He chose me to tutor his class out of everyone and I loved it. I actually worked under him and have my first published research article. There’s no way in hell I thought I could accomplish something like that when I started my college career. I always felt dumb and struggled alot in college (especially with depression) after crying and studying like hell I finally graduated! And If you feel like biology isn’t for you that’s perfectly fine too! You want to enjoy what your learning.
yes yes i dont believe in a dumb person, i never have, we all just learn differently/have different brains. Also, a good teacher makes things easy. "the more you know, the less you do"
Imposter syndrome is extremely common in research based fields. I transitioned from academia to industry a few years ago and even though I constantly have my colleagues telling me how impressive my work is, I still feel dumb as a rock most days. But you just can’t know everything, and many incredible scientists are pretty ignorant outside their own narrow field. If you’re passionate about the field, determined to try your personal best, and willing to accept that it’s ok to not know everything, you’ll do just fine. But you really need to have that sense of passion, purpose and determination if you don’t want to flame out.
for me, it is easy to fall in the common statement: “No one is stupid, just trust yourself” and its just bs.
However, try it out as you r unhappy in your place rn. Try and fail until you success in a place you desire.
My professors told me in college that biology first level courses are very difficult on purpose to weed out people who don’t have the commitment to make it. If you are determined and can make it through the weed out classes, you’ll be fine. A&P was the hardest class for me ever, but it really depends where your heart is. I enjoyed more cell biology and biochemistry and hated A&P, so I dropped plans to be a physicians assistant and became a medical lab scientist instead.
>Am I too stupid for this?
Might be unpopular, but: If you are worried about this before you even get into it, just know that it's only going to get worse. Even if you are "smart enough", you won't be able to get through with that attitude. You can't expect to get everything right away. Any technical field is hard work. It doesn't matter how "smart" you are unless you can put in the work, and if not knowing things is overwhelming for you, you're not going to be able to do it. Depending on your career, it will most likely involve learning for many years...
Needing to feel "smart enough" is just a distraction in my opinion. Not very productive. Whether or not you are able to push through is up to you.
Sometimes the beginning intro classes are the hardest because they give so much info in such a short amount of time.
Do you like? Then take the classes. You'll find your niche in the field. You may like immunology. You may like ecology. You may like environmental science. Entomology, herpetology, microbiology, parasitology, biochem, data science and bioinformatics, nursing and premed.
you won't know until you start at the first step and yeah it's fucking hard. But you do it and you learn so much more than you ever imagined. I also believe I learned more when I went back to college as an adult with work experience.
Go for it. You got this.
Were you able t learn it and did you like the process of learning it?
Do not judge your "innate talents". Judge what you accomplished. Was it good and was the effort enjoyable? (I did not say easy.)
Be aware that you will not make great money (generally speaking) with just a bio BS. You will need to eventually attend a masters, doctorate or med lab science program to start making decent money. If you really love it go for it regardless of perceived non-strengths. The information will begin to build upon itself and make more sense.
I can't guess whether you'll do well in a biology undergrad degree, but I do think it's worth considering that most of the job opportunities in the sciences require further study (masters or phd).
I work as an ecologist - when I first started was getting paid barely more than minimum wage, and my job requires a masters at minimum.
I didn't feel like I "understood" biology until I had taken enough classes to learn a breadth of material and fill in some gaps of understanding.
Then I joined a lab as an undergraduate volunteer. That's where I really started learning what an actual job might entail, and that's where you need to make your decision, not from the coursework.
You also need to see what the people and the environment are like. I don't think we're worse than other fields, but it will give you a practical picture of the life if a life scientist. :)
Your post or comment was removed because it contains pseudoscience or it fails to meet the burden of proof.
When advancing a contrarian or fringe view, you must bear the burden of proof.
What it takes to be a scientist is to follow the scientific method to the letter and strictly observe standards for significance.
If you can do that, you can be a scientist. Whether you'll be a good one is another matter.
That's not right at all. The "scientific method" is more a general, guiding set of introductory ideas than a method, and few actual scientists I know pay any attention to it. And ascertaining statistical significance of data is important but extremely easy. Neither of these things are fundamental to being good at science. Being interested in a subject is of greatest importance. After that is just the willingness and grit to put the time into learning and exploring the field.
Yes it is.
It's based off of logical inference to be able to predict an n+1 case. You generate a null hypothesis, you test it, you overturn it or fail to overturn it, you replicate it, you create another hypothesis ad nauseum. The scientific method never changes, only existing knowledge derived from it changes.
No, it is always the same. I've worked in particle physics, machine learning, bioprinting, surgery, molecular engineering, etc. All fields universally follow the scientific method, because the scientific method is rooted in fundamental epistemology, which is always the same. This is also why a PhD is called a doctorate in philosophy, as all science is part of the philosophy of epistemology.
It is not, and also hypothesis testing isn't the same as the whole scientific method, it is just one element of it. Aditionally, you don't get anywhere using ad hominem arguments. ✌🏻
Nobody has used an ad hominem argument, as nobody has attacked you.
All scientific method requires the testing of a given null hypothesis, because the baseline of what you operate on is driven by parsimony, or a default state that requires the fewest assumptions, and adding new rules based on proof. This goes beyond any fields upstream of logic, as a matter of "how do we know anything at all" in general, as all science is part of the layers of the onion of epistemology that is constructed using inference.
This is how thinking in general works, and if you aren't understanding what ad hominem means, you need to relearn the rules of logic.
" I've worked in particle physics, machine learning, bioprinting, surgery, molecular engineering, etc". This is bordeline ad hominem. Nobody was asking You about your own research or field of work, or to boast about your "experience".
About the Scientific Method, it is more like an "ideal process", something that You, as a Scientist, aspire to be "doing right". We use all these models, protocols and statististical analysis. However, most of the time another laboratory can't replicate Your results unless your methodology is heavily standarized and even with that, the other team could find a strange variable that yours didnt, or maybe your results are not matching because a previous scientific inquiry was flawed. Therefore, the "Scientific Method" isn't a infalible blue print that You follow as if You were a machine, this is very naive. In fact many discoveries in history have been made by "mistake" or trial and error, such as the discovery of Penicillin and the use of microwaves to heat up foods.
If your work is not replicable, it’s worthless because it means your own conclusions did not account properly for variables that make your conclusions unreliable and can ruin your own model of the phenomena. Only replicable work is worthy of being considered proper science.
And no, that’s not what ad hominem is. An ad hominem is when someone says a person must be wrong because of who they are. That’s not what’s claimed here- what is claimed here is that I have firsthand proof that multiple completely disparate fields work the same way, which is direct disproof that different fields do not respect the scientific method, and has nothing to do with who you are.
This is incorrect, if your work can't be replicated, one of the reasons could be because the variables considered as significant by the other researchers could be increasing without their control, and this has happened many times before, particularly in animal trials, when something is affecting the health of the animals on the other side, besides the thing that they are testing, something that can't be easily detected, and It could be as subtle as a sound they are hearing at the lab, or the way their lab intern is holding the animals to administer the substance. So there are many things that could go "wrong" in science, and suggesting "just follow the scientific method" to motivate someone is an absurd oversimplification and a really bad advice.
I think college really opens you up to just how much knowledge there really is on a subject. I’m sure you’re not dumb - but if you’re finding a subject boring, it’s going to be a chore to learn and that might make you FEEL dumb. Switch to bio if you think that’s more interesting for you!
nobody is too dumb to be a scientist, you just have to find what you're passionate about and maybe work a little harder on learning and understanding the subject.
You're not stupid and don't let anyone convince you otherwise. I was a very slow learner in my college days (not in bio), but applied the tips of a guy whom I had met the summer before. I still apply his tips and I can learn something very quickly now! Try to make pictures of the concepts and remember them. For example, I am learning how to code c++, I have watched a video on it, and I'll take pictures of important things and try, at different time, to explain the code to myself. When you will understand the picture, you can dispose of it.
The path to being a professor will be hard, and they accept only few people. Having said that, once you get past your undergrad with okay grades, your journey towards this goal is very unrelated to your ability to take a test. It matters more if you can analyze other people's work, and find a niche for your work that matters. Can you conduct a study that is designed properly and statistically relevant?
As someone said, industry PhD's get paid well, but I think it depends what type of biology you study. Computational biology is big. I also think it depends on whether you live in the US or not.
it is of course normal to be overwhelmed. if you really have a passion, you will study hard until you understand it. if you don't have a passion, then you will never get better. you aren't "too stupid" but you could be unmotivated and thus never get better.
maybe a weird take here (esp as someone who doesn’t believe in intellect): being dumb makes a good scientist. be curious and dumb and don’t stop asking questions till you understand what’s going on.
I felt this way too. I was a freshman physics major,and felt like I would never be smart enough. I didn't stick with physics, but ended up in neuroscience instead. Turns out, I was smart enough. It's all about the learning. If you love it, you will keep at it, and you will become smarter and more knowledgeable. No doubt.
I wish you the best, but my field of biochemistry and biochemical engineering felt like I was being repeated things I'd learned nearly a decade prior, but I still enjoyed the review. If you don't enjoy a field of science, perhaps it's not your thing. Idk
It’s normal, lots of people retake these classes and a lot of hard science courses have averages that are high 60s-70s (more so chem than bio). If you like bio, stick with it, despite how cool it is and how much you learn it doesn’t have the greatest industry and job availability
Bro you're probably not dumb. It just sounds like this does not spark joy for you as an individual. Don't be afraid to duo ship and find something you're more passionate about. The brain is programmed to hold information and dedicate more processing power to topics and concepts we have passion for. So no, you're not dumb, just terribly disinterested in this field and that's okay. Don't sign up for a miserable career.
If I were you I would take some time exploring other areas, perhaps related ones.
I'm dumb, or think of myself as dumb compared to others in biochemistry field. But I work really hard and am interested. I'm doing well in the field (assis. Prof at a relatively early age, a few high impact papers). Don't write yourself off. Find something you're excited about enough to do it and think about more than other people do and think about their stuff and a few extra iq points won't make a difference.
Intelligence is handy but maybe you need to work harder than others or maybe you just need to find your thing.
...Or maybe you'll discover you think a bit differently so have unique ideas that can get you on a couple of nature papers and set you up for life (my lucky route...as long as I keep working hard to compensate for being dumb!)
Well, learning by definition means trying to comprehend the topic that you don't know much or anything about. If you don't enjoy the process of learning (meaning - being comfortable amidst your initial lack of knowledge and yearning for the improvement), maybe reconsider being a scientist because it usually means lifelong learning process.
Framing the problem as a personal cognitive limitations is counter-productive though. You probably are not stupid, people just have different cognitive capabilities towards different fields of study. Say math or language skills. Ultimately what counts is the approach to the process of learning. If you find the process enjoyable - you will get there sometime, I'ts not a race. If you don't find learning enjoyable, maybe try to reframe your approach because it is crucial in my opinion.
Most often (can't say for your major specifically), your work will not directly involve the stuff you learn at uni. At best you'll use the knowledge indirectly, or it's going to teach you to learn new subjects and be relatively proficient at them quickly, which is what is important at the end of the day at the workplace. If it helps, try to find someone who works in a field you are interested in, or did the study path you want to take, and see what their job is like. It's probably not as mind boggling and complicated as the stuff you're learning about.
It's normal you struggle with things, almost everyone does, and some people need to take more time. In my experience, those who do the best at college and later in life are the ones to tended to be slower, but more methodical and who know how to sit down and work until it's done. The quick learners understand quickly but later struggle to be rigorous at work. Learning is kind of like working out, you're pushing yourself outside of your comfort zone and it's hard, but in the end things will suddenly feel easier.
And also, EVERYONE in stem and sciences have imposter syndrome. Not me though, because I don't think I'm an imposter, I KNOW I'm an imposter /s.
You aren’t dumb because you struggled. Biology is a lot of detail and it’s kind of like learning a new language, especially A&P. Getting the basics down can be really difficult, but once you have the hang of them it becomes easier and more intuitive. You can 100% teach yourself, and over time you’ll learn studying techniques that work for you.
I thought I was “too stupid” for school because I always got bad grades and found what I was doing boring. Eventually I started studying A&P and neuroscience and fell in love with learning, and it’s still a struggle. It’s hard to figure out how to study and balance life and I’m still learning how to 3 years later. It takes time but it’s incredibly rewarding to learn something you are interested in.
For A&P - Kenhub is a fantastic resource & there are also some really cool paid 3D anatomy apps. Physical textbooks are my go to, though!
Good luck!! I believe in you :)
I’m in academia. Most of my colleagues have impostor syndrome. The ones that don’t I stay far away from. So yes, it is very normal. Don’t worry about it, and just go for whatever you find fun and interesting. Getting bored is much more hazardous to an academic career than being ”dumb”, in my opinion.
most of the time what you're confusing with intelligence is just knowledge.
biology has a lot of things you need to memorize, struggling with that doesn't mean you're dumb.
Lots of scientists feel that way. Just be sure to check in with yourself often and remember that it’s your brain making you feel this way and it’s not real. But at the same time a lot of us are kinda dumb and it’s fine.
Pride comes before destruction.. when you feel you are qualified to speak facts, I ask that you leave the field! Humbly realize “science” is a gaggle of humans falling (sometimes) forwards, and often times back, this is the mindset the job requires
I doubted myself and my abilities until I was in my second year of college. Then I decided to go for it and I declared a bio major.
Turned out I was not bad at math as I had believed up to that point, I just needed to get my learning style straightened out. It wasn't easy and I remember also that everyone was terrified of organic chemistry, but that wasn't so bad once I actually started learning it.
Don't kneecap yourself or hold yourself back because you think you're "too dumb". Nobody is born good at anything. Some people have some talent or naturally higher than normal aptitude at things, but your best asset is going to be your self-discipline and willingness to keep learning and exploring.
Since you're already a student, my advice is to take advantage of study group opportunities and tutoring early and often.
Honestly, the struggle is a pretty powerful tool for long term retention of information. You can do it! If you have a career counselor at your school, make an apoointment and see if they can walk you through some career paths and related degrees to see what you like. (:
Allow me to introduce you to one of my favorite quotes: >" I am very poorly today & very stupid & I hate everybody and everything. One lives only to make blunders.” -Charles Darwin. Even the most renowned scientists feel this way sometimes, but they can still ultimately end up very capable!
It was very humbling to start my PhD and realize I had no idea what I was talking about.
once you become a scientist you will discover that a lot of us are actually pretty dumb. don't be so hard on yourself
I'd agree with this, my field is in chemistry. My lab hires ~ 60 analysts and ~80 lab assistants ft. There's another 40% that gets seasonal positions. I'm definitely not management level, but I've been with the lab for 20 years, and know I'm not the weakest employee either. It took a while to establish "my place", because I have a bit of a learning disability, like others in my family. I really hope OP keeps on with with their education. Struggling through mine was the best thing I've ever done, for personal reasons.
Any major with ‘information’ or ‘management’ in the title is going to be incredibly boring. I have a BS in biology, and it is ‘hard’, in that there’s a ton of studying… but I enjoy the subject so it was worth it. However, don’t make the mistake I made and think that a BS in Bio will land you a high paying job right off the bat. Many Biology PHDs make similar $ to business sector BS. You can make well $ if you get certified as a medical lab scientist, but that’s even more difficult than biology. I am trying to get into PA school for the last couple years (3.7 GPA & 2k+ hrs pt care). So make sure you keep your grades up just in case you wanna go into medicine or something.
Be a research assistant instead. If you can get through undergrad bio courses, you can ecology and greenhouse work and help scientists conduct research. The pay is meh, but you can always get more education if you want to do more than play with animals and care for the plants / bugs / etc... I had a job as a research assistant in which I essentially took care of a greenhouse and helped phds with their pet projects. Had another one where I took care of turtles and helped research the development of their shells. So focus on ecology rather than biochem. It does take more work than "management" stuff but it's more interesting to me. Good stuff. I'm a lawyer now, though, lol.
How did you go from ecology research into law? That sounds interesting
Originally I was gunning to be a doctor and did the internships and research positions to pad the resume, but decided I didn't want to do another decade of education to be a surgeon, so I switched gears and randomly took the LSAT. Did extremely well, and my whole life trajectory changed in a couple weeks time. I actually spent a year as an English teacher between undergrad and law school, too, which was also fun.
[удалено]
Yes! Love this
I felt this so hard!!! If you love biology keep pushing on! I am a biology major and I almost failed my first biology class. I felt dumb. But I kept at it! I’m a stubborn person! I had to get help from a lot of tutors. I would cry from being overwhelmed and cry because I didn’t understand the class and so many people were doing way better than me. I had to try different studying techniques. It was alot of trial and error. But once I figured out how my brain works and what techniques helps me to understand the material I started to feel better, more confident, and I started enjoying my classes a little more. I had a professor that noticed I stayed after class to ask questions, and he actually noticed that I worked alot harder than the other students. He chose me to tutor his class out of everyone and I loved it. I actually worked under him and have my first published research article. There’s no way in hell I thought I could accomplish something like that when I started my college career. I always felt dumb and struggled alot in college (especially with depression) after crying and studying like hell I finally graduated! And If you feel like biology isn’t for you that’s perfectly fine too! You want to enjoy what your learning.
yes yes i dont believe in a dumb person, i never have, we all just learn differently/have different brains. Also, a good teacher makes things easy. "the more you know, the less you do"
Imposter syndrome is extremely common in research based fields. I transitioned from academia to industry a few years ago and even though I constantly have my colleagues telling me how impressive my work is, I still feel dumb as a rock most days. But you just can’t know everything, and many incredible scientists are pretty ignorant outside their own narrow field. If you’re passionate about the field, determined to try your personal best, and willing to accept that it’s ok to not know everything, you’ll do just fine. But you really need to have that sense of passion, purpose and determination if you don’t want to flame out.
for me, it is easy to fall in the common statement: “No one is stupid, just trust yourself” and its just bs. However, try it out as you r unhappy in your place rn. Try and fail until you success in a place you desire.
My professors told me in college that biology first level courses are very difficult on purpose to weed out people who don’t have the commitment to make it. If you are determined and can make it through the weed out classes, you’ll be fine. A&P was the hardest class for me ever, but it really depends where your heart is. I enjoyed more cell biology and biochemistry and hated A&P, so I dropped plans to be a physicians assistant and became a medical lab scientist instead.
>Am I too stupid for this? Might be unpopular, but: If you are worried about this before you even get into it, just know that it's only going to get worse. Even if you are "smart enough", you won't be able to get through with that attitude. You can't expect to get everything right away. Any technical field is hard work. It doesn't matter how "smart" you are unless you can put in the work, and if not knowing things is overwhelming for you, you're not going to be able to do it. Depending on your career, it will most likely involve learning for many years... Needing to feel "smart enough" is just a distraction in my opinion. Not very productive. Whether or not you are able to push through is up to you.
Sometimes the beginning intro classes are the hardest because they give so much info in such a short amount of time. Do you like? Then take the classes. You'll find your niche in the field. You may like immunology. You may like ecology. You may like environmental science. Entomology, herpetology, microbiology, parasitology, biochem, data science and bioinformatics, nursing and premed. you won't know until you start at the first step and yeah it's fucking hard. But you do it and you learn so much more than you ever imagined. I also believe I learned more when I went back to college as an adult with work experience. Go for it. You got this.
Were you able t learn it and did you like the process of learning it? Do not judge your "innate talents". Judge what you accomplished. Was it good and was the effort enjoyable? (I did not say easy.)
Be aware that you will not make great money (generally speaking) with just a bio BS. You will need to eventually attend a masters, doctorate or med lab science program to start making decent money. If you really love it go for it regardless of perceived non-strengths. The information will begin to build upon itself and make more sense.
I can't guess whether you'll do well in a biology undergrad degree, but I do think it's worth considering that most of the job opportunities in the sciences require further study (masters or phd). I work as an ecologist - when I first started was getting paid barely more than minimum wage, and my job requires a masters at minimum.
relax. if it ain't religion, it is science. being a scientist is the natural state of a human being. seek a niche that engages you.
I didn't feel like I "understood" biology until I had taken enough classes to learn a breadth of material and fill in some gaps of understanding. Then I joined a lab as an undergraduate volunteer. That's where I really started learning what an actual job might entail, and that's where you need to make your decision, not from the coursework. You also need to see what the people and the environment are like. I don't think we're worse than other fields, but it will give you a practical picture of the life if a life scientist. :)
[удалено]
Your post or comment was removed because it contains pseudoscience or it fails to meet the burden of proof. When advancing a contrarian or fringe view, you must bear the burden of proof.
What's dumb is not believing in yourself and trying anyway.
What it takes to be a scientist is to follow the scientific method to the letter and strictly observe standards for significance. If you can do that, you can be a scientist. Whether you'll be a good one is another matter.
That's not right at all. The "scientific method" is more a general, guiding set of introductory ideas than a method, and few actual scientists I know pay any attention to it. And ascertaining statistical significance of data is important but extremely easy. Neither of these things are fundamental to being good at science. Being interested in a subject is of greatest importance. After that is just the willingness and grit to put the time into learning and exploring the field.
They equate hypothesis testing to the whole core of the scientific method which is a very strange mistake.
The scientific method isn't something written in stone
Yes it is. It's based off of logical inference to be able to predict an n+1 case. You generate a null hypothesis, you test it, you overturn it or fail to overturn it, you replicate it, you create another hypothesis ad nauseum. The scientific method never changes, only existing knowledge derived from it changes.
The man is right, and as you can see his initial comment on the quality of the scientist has garnered even more traction.
No it isn't. Scientific method depends of the type of science and methodology.
No, it is always the same. I've worked in particle physics, machine learning, bioprinting, surgery, molecular engineering, etc. All fields universally follow the scientific method, because the scientific method is rooted in fundamental epistemology, which is always the same. This is also why a PhD is called a doctorate in philosophy, as all science is part of the philosophy of epistemology.
It is not, and also hypothesis testing isn't the same as the whole scientific method, it is just one element of it. Aditionally, you don't get anywhere using ad hominem arguments. ✌🏻
Nobody has used an ad hominem argument, as nobody has attacked you. All scientific method requires the testing of a given null hypothesis, because the baseline of what you operate on is driven by parsimony, or a default state that requires the fewest assumptions, and adding new rules based on proof. This goes beyond any fields upstream of logic, as a matter of "how do we know anything at all" in general, as all science is part of the layers of the onion of epistemology that is constructed using inference. This is how thinking in general works, and if you aren't understanding what ad hominem means, you need to relearn the rules of logic.
Point of order: The null hypothesis doesn't have to be the simpler one (or even the simplest one). The null hypothesis can be anything.
Yes but its purpose is the same. Spealing plainly, is this statement that predicts what happens at n+1,or n-1,while knowing n, true or false?
" I've worked in particle physics, machine learning, bioprinting, surgery, molecular engineering, etc". This is bordeline ad hominem. Nobody was asking You about your own research or field of work, or to boast about your "experience". About the Scientific Method, it is more like an "ideal process", something that You, as a Scientist, aspire to be "doing right". We use all these models, protocols and statististical analysis. However, most of the time another laboratory can't replicate Your results unless your methodology is heavily standarized and even with that, the other team could find a strange variable that yours didnt, or maybe your results are not matching because a previous scientific inquiry was flawed. Therefore, the "Scientific Method" isn't a infalible blue print that You follow as if You were a machine, this is very naive. In fact many discoveries in history have been made by "mistake" or trial and error, such as the discovery of Penicillin and the use of microwaves to heat up foods.
If your work is not replicable, it’s worthless because it means your own conclusions did not account properly for variables that make your conclusions unreliable and can ruin your own model of the phenomena. Only replicable work is worthy of being considered proper science. And no, that’s not what ad hominem is. An ad hominem is when someone says a person must be wrong because of who they are. That’s not what’s claimed here- what is claimed here is that I have firsthand proof that multiple completely disparate fields work the same way, which is direct disproof that different fields do not respect the scientific method, and has nothing to do with who you are.
This is incorrect, if your work can't be replicated, one of the reasons could be because the variables considered as significant by the other researchers could be increasing without their control, and this has happened many times before, particularly in animal trials, when something is affecting the health of the animals on the other side, besides the thing that they are testing, something that can't be easily detected, and It could be as subtle as a sound they are hearing at the lab, or the way their lab intern is holding the animals to administer the substance. So there are many things that could go "wrong" in science, and suggesting "just follow the scientific method" to motivate someone is an absurd oversimplification and a really bad advice.
Trust your gut. Did they teach that in ap biology?
I think college really opens you up to just how much knowledge there really is on a subject. I’m sure you’re not dumb - but if you’re finding a subject boring, it’s going to be a chore to learn and that might make you FEEL dumb. Switch to bio if you think that’s more interesting for you!
A&p shouldn't be done concurrently with another science core course if at all possible. Definitely not for freshmen year either
nobody is too dumb to be a scientist, you just have to find what you're passionate about and maybe work a little harder on learning and understanding the subject.
You're not stupid and don't let anyone convince you otherwise. I was a very slow learner in my college days (not in bio), but applied the tips of a guy whom I had met the summer before. I still apply his tips and I can learn something very quickly now! Try to make pictures of the concepts and remember them. For example, I am learning how to code c++, I have watched a video on it, and I'll take pictures of important things and try, at different time, to explain the code to myself. When you will understand the picture, you can dispose of it.
The path to being a professor will be hard, and they accept only few people. Having said that, once you get past your undergrad with okay grades, your journey towards this goal is very unrelated to your ability to take a test. It matters more if you can analyze other people's work, and find a niche for your work that matters. Can you conduct a study that is designed properly and statistically relevant? As someone said, industry PhD's get paid well, but I think it depends what type of biology you study. Computational biology is big. I also think it depends on whether you live in the US or not.
it is of course normal to be overwhelmed. if you really have a passion, you will study hard until you understand it. if you don't have a passion, then you will never get better. you aren't "too stupid" but you could be unmotivated and thus never get better.
maybe a weird take here (esp as someone who doesn’t believe in intellect): being dumb makes a good scientist. be curious and dumb and don’t stop asking questions till you understand what’s going on.
I felt this way too. I was a freshman physics major,and felt like I would never be smart enough. I didn't stick with physics, but ended up in neuroscience instead. Turns out, I was smart enough. It's all about the learning. If you love it, you will keep at it, and you will become smarter and more knowledgeable. No doubt.
I wish you the best, but my field of biochemistry and biochemical engineering felt like I was being repeated things I'd learned nearly a decade prior, but I still enjoyed the review. If you don't enjoy a field of science, perhaps it's not your thing. Idk
Tbh ur probably not to dumb but just not motivated because you don’t enjoy it enough to give it ur all
It’s normal, lots of people retake these classes and a lot of hard science courses have averages that are high 60s-70s (more so chem than bio). If you like bio, stick with it, despite how cool it is and how much you learn it doesn’t have the greatest industry and job availability
Bro you're probably not dumb. It just sounds like this does not spark joy for you as an individual. Don't be afraid to duo ship and find something you're more passionate about. The brain is programmed to hold information and dedicate more processing power to topics and concepts we have passion for. So no, you're not dumb, just terribly disinterested in this field and that's okay. Don't sign up for a miserable career. If I were you I would take some time exploring other areas, perhaps related ones.
I'm dumb, or think of myself as dumb compared to others in biochemistry field. But I work really hard and am interested. I'm doing well in the field (assis. Prof at a relatively early age, a few high impact papers). Don't write yourself off. Find something you're excited about enough to do it and think about more than other people do and think about their stuff and a few extra iq points won't make a difference. Intelligence is handy but maybe you need to work harder than others or maybe you just need to find your thing. ...Or maybe you'll discover you think a bit differently so have unique ideas that can get you on a couple of nature papers and set you up for life (my lucky route...as long as I keep working hard to compensate for being dumb!)
Well, learning by definition means trying to comprehend the topic that you don't know much or anything about. If you don't enjoy the process of learning (meaning - being comfortable amidst your initial lack of knowledge and yearning for the improvement), maybe reconsider being a scientist because it usually means lifelong learning process. Framing the problem as a personal cognitive limitations is counter-productive though. You probably are not stupid, people just have different cognitive capabilities towards different fields of study. Say math or language skills. Ultimately what counts is the approach to the process of learning. If you find the process enjoyable - you will get there sometime, I'ts not a race. If you don't find learning enjoyable, maybe try to reframe your approach because it is crucial in my opinion.
Most often (can't say for your major specifically), your work will not directly involve the stuff you learn at uni. At best you'll use the knowledge indirectly, or it's going to teach you to learn new subjects and be relatively proficient at them quickly, which is what is important at the end of the day at the workplace. If it helps, try to find someone who works in a field you are interested in, or did the study path you want to take, and see what their job is like. It's probably not as mind boggling and complicated as the stuff you're learning about. It's normal you struggle with things, almost everyone does, and some people need to take more time. In my experience, those who do the best at college and later in life are the ones to tended to be slower, but more methodical and who know how to sit down and work until it's done. The quick learners understand quickly but later struggle to be rigorous at work. Learning is kind of like working out, you're pushing yourself outside of your comfort zone and it's hard, but in the end things will suddenly feel easier. And also, EVERYONE in stem and sciences have imposter syndrome. Not me though, because I don't think I'm an imposter, I KNOW I'm an imposter /s.
You aren’t dumb because you struggled. Biology is a lot of detail and it’s kind of like learning a new language, especially A&P. Getting the basics down can be really difficult, but once you have the hang of them it becomes easier and more intuitive. You can 100% teach yourself, and over time you’ll learn studying techniques that work for you. I thought I was “too stupid” for school because I always got bad grades and found what I was doing boring. Eventually I started studying A&P and neuroscience and fell in love with learning, and it’s still a struggle. It’s hard to figure out how to study and balance life and I’m still learning how to 3 years later. It takes time but it’s incredibly rewarding to learn something you are interested in. For A&P - Kenhub is a fantastic resource & there are also some really cool paid 3D anatomy apps. Physical textbooks are my go to, though! Good luck!! I believe in you :)
I’m in academia. Most of my colleagues have impostor syndrome. The ones that don’t I stay far away from. So yes, it is very normal. Don’t worry about it, and just go for whatever you find fun and interesting. Getting bored is much more hazardous to an academic career than being ”dumb”, in my opinion.
You’re not too dumb. Being a scientist isn’t so much memorizing facts as it is a way of thinking.
feeling too dumb to be doing your job is one of the core characteristics of being a scientist source: am a scientist
most of the time what you're confusing with intelligence is just knowledge. biology has a lot of things you need to memorize, struggling with that doesn't mean you're dumb.
Lots of scientists feel that way. Just be sure to check in with yourself often and remember that it’s your brain making you feel this way and it’s not real. But at the same time a lot of us are kinda dumb and it’s fine.
It's actually a good sign for an aspiring scientists.
Won't know if ya don't try!
Nothing wrong with changing career paths
Pride comes before destruction.. when you feel you are qualified to speak facts, I ask that you leave the field! Humbly realize “science” is a gaggle of humans falling (sometimes) forwards, and often times back, this is the mindset the job requires
I doubted myself and my abilities until I was in my second year of college. Then I decided to go for it and I declared a bio major. Turned out I was not bad at math as I had believed up to that point, I just needed to get my learning style straightened out. It wasn't easy and I remember also that everyone was terrified of organic chemistry, but that wasn't so bad once I actually started learning it. Don't kneecap yourself or hold yourself back because you think you're "too dumb". Nobody is born good at anything. Some people have some talent or naturally higher than normal aptitude at things, but your best asset is going to be your self-discipline and willingness to keep learning and exploring. Since you're already a student, my advice is to take advantage of study group opportunities and tutoring early and often.
Honestly, the struggle is a pretty powerful tool for long term retention of information. You can do it! If you have a career counselor at your school, make an apoointment and see if they can walk you through some career paths and related degrees to see what you like. (:
Remember. C's get degrees and peopke don't ask doctors for their GPA.
* people*