Hardest and Easiest Majors in College for Undergrad

What do you think are the hardest and easiest majors?

Personally,

Hardest: Math or some type of engineering

Easiest: Women's Studies...there's only so much you can study in a kitchen

Hardest College Majors

While this is a hard question to answer due to each individual's talents, there is a generally accept consensus about what are the hardest majors. While this list is subject to change depending on which school you go to, some of the hardest majors are:

  • Engineering: math, geometry, physics, etc.
  • Business: finance, management, HR, entrepreneurial, etc
  • Life/Physical Sciences: anatomy, genetics, biology, chemistry, physics
  • Architecture

Easiest College Majors

Again this list is subject to change depending on each school's demand for each major. Typically the easiest majors include:

  • Humanities: foreign language, literature, writing
  • Education: teaching courses, English
  • Sociology: social structure, behavior, etc
  • Communication: communication channels, publications
  • History

If you have any other majors that you would like to vouch being more difficult or any other majors to add please comment below!

Read More About College Majors and Minors on WSO

Preparing for Investment Banking Interviews?

The WSO investment banking interview course is designed by countless professionals with real world experience, tailored to people aspiring to break into the industry. This guide will help you learn how to answer these questions and many, many more.

Investment Banking Interview Course Here

 

the difficulty of economics really depends on the school you study it at and when you studied it. At Penn for example, it's much more quantitative (e.g. multivariate calculus is a requirement of the major).

 

Hardest: Biophysics, Molecular Bio ( and any other non general bio major), Physics, EE, Chem E, Math, Stats, Econ (at schools that require a math background), civil engineering.

Easiest: Psychology, business (I think everything except finance courses in the business school are a joke), any social science major, english.

 
At Penn for example, it's much more quantitative (e.g. multivariate calculus is a requirement of the major).

Same at Columbia; Multi-variable calc is a pre-req for the major. Basically, at all decent schools, the Econ major is extremely quantitative, and in the same bracket as Math and engineering. Now, if you went to a crappy school then that's another story, as Economics at schools lower than USNEWS top-15 tend to be pretty easy.

 

The consensus seems to be that any major with a rigorous math component fits into the hard category, any science major that does NOT require heavy math is of medium difficulty, and anything that could be considered part of the liberal arts spectrum is easy.

For the record even the most difficult economics programs still get laughed at by the mathematics departments at their respective schools.

 

Insane: Chemical E, Astro Physics

Hard: Mathematics, Physics, Bio-Chem, Chemistry, Other Engineering Subsets, Comp Sci

Moderate Difficulty: Econ, Finance, Acct, Biology

Easy: Marketing, Management, History

Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

 
kingtut:
Insane: Chemical E, Astro Physics

Hard: Mathematics, Physics, Bio-Chem, Chemistry, Other Engineering Subsets, Comp Sci

Moderate Difficulty: Econ, Finance, Acct, Biology

Easy: Marketing, Management, History

Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

dont laugh at art history. that perspective is increasingly valuable in pwm as art is becoming an attractive alternative asset class among high net worth clients especially in emerging asia. nobody's going to ask an econ major how to value a rothko.

 
JRODG:
kingtut:
Insane: Chemical E, Astro Physics

Hard: Mathematics, Physics, Bio-Chem, Chemistry, Other Engineering Subsets, Comp Sci

Moderate Difficulty: Econ, Finance, Acct, Biology

Easy: Marketing, Management, History

Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

dont laugh at art history. that perspective is increasingly valuable in pwm as art is becoming an attractive alternative asset class among high net worth clients especially in emerging asia. nobody's going to ask an econ major how to value a rothko.

What's so hard about valuing a painting?
 
kingtut:
Insane: Chemical E, Astro Physics

Hard: Mathematics, Physics, Bio-Chem, Chemistry, Other Engineering Subsets, Comp Sci

Moderate Difficulty: Econ, Finance, Acct, Biology

Easy: Marketing, Management, History

Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

Agree with most of this ranking.

Now as someone that majored in ChemE the past three years before deciding to pussy out and switch majors to salvage his bleeding GPA, I would say ChemE is on the same tier as EE/Comp.E. The other traditional disciplines of engineering are a little easier than the afore-mentioned three.

 
kingtut:
Insane: Chemical E, Astro Physics

Hard: Mathematics, Physics, Bio-Chem, Chemistry, Other Engineering Subsets, Comp Sci

Moderate Difficulty: Econ, Finance, Acct, Biology

Easy: Marketing, Management, History

Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

Not sure why such an old thread was brought up, but this list is pretty spot on for undergrad.

I personally was choosing between the "insane" majors, but ended up going ChemE . When it gets to post-doc work, math and various forms of physics probably take the cake.

Hierarchy of engineering: 1) chem 2) mechanical/electrical 3) civil/environmental

 
Moderate Difficulty: Econ, Finance, Acct, Biology

I think there was a thread here a few weeks ago where most posters (a lot of finance majors as well) agreed that Finance was a lot easier than Economics. There's nothing really difficult about undergrad Finance.

Also, at Columbia, there are two types of Econ majors: regular Economics, and Financial Economics (half Econ/half Finance). Students almost unanimously agree that adding Finance courses (both intermediate and Advanced) makes the Financial Economics major much easier than the regular one.

 
seedy underbelly:
Moderate Difficulty: Econ, Finance, Acct, Biology

I think there was a thread here a few weeks ago where most posters (a lot of finance majors as well) agreed that Finance was a lot easier than Economics. There's nothing really difficult about undergrad Finance.

Also, at Columbia, there are two types of Econ majors: regular Economics, and Financial Economics (half Econ/half Finance). Students almost unanimously agree that adding Finance courses (both intermediate and Advanced) makes the Financial Economics major much easier than the regular one.

Well, Columbia is Columbia. For the vast majority of schools that do not incorporate a lot of intense math into the curriculum econ really isn't that hard. I would agree that econ is somewhat more difficult than finance. I tend to lump econ and finance together as they're so intertwined. You can't understand how the capital markets function unless you understand the economics driving it and vice versa

 

I have undergrad degrees in both accounting and finance. both were easy. accounting might have the difficulty edge just because the volume of work was quite a bit more than finance. but conceptually, neither is difficult.

i have a masters in comp sci. the math alone that is required for graduate level computer science dwarfs anything required in undergrad business school.

 

1$$physics 2$$math 3$$engineering .... 4$science(bio,chem,etc) 5$ the bizzzznussesss... & economics, (exclude bizman &marketing) .... 6 history, english, 7 psychology bc sigmund freud was legit 8 sociology, & other dumb majors,

 

most of you don't know what you're talking about- and worst of all you're dismissing rigorousness between schools.

For example, I've seen the math major curriculum for a non-target which doesn't offer a math PhD: their one-semester "analysis" requirement uses Apostol's book! (That's the book used for Yale's Calc I-II classes and Penn's Honors Sequence of Calc I-II.) And their algebra requirement is just an intro linear algebra course.

Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

So difficulty=mathematical content, is that all?

Because a student has to be pretty damn clever to write well researched/thought-out papers for a religious studies, philosophy or an art history major (again at a top school or ivy). Compare that to a business/finance major at a state school and (1) their quantitative background is comparable if not better due to pre-college background and (2) their research/writing ability far surpasses.

 
Seigniorage:
most of you don't know what you're talking about- and worst of all you're dismissing rigorousness between schools.

For example, I've seen the math major curriculum for a non-target which doesn't offer a math PhD: their one-semester "analysis" requirement uses Apostol's book! (That's the book used for Yale's Calc I-II classes and Penn's Honors Sequence of Calc I-II.) And their algebra requirement is just an intro linear algebra course.

Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

So difficulty=mathematical content, is that all?

Because a student has to be pretty damn clever to write well researched/thought-out papers for a religious studies, philosophy or an art history major (again at a top school or ivy). Compare that to a business/finance major at a state school and (1) their quantitative background is comparable if not better due to pre-college background and (2) their research/writing ability far surpasses.

I never knew any one who though linear algebra was hard at any school.......

 
Joke: Psychology, Sociology, Gender Studies, Education, Religious Studies

Why The Fuck Are Parents Paying For Tuition: Art History

So difficulty=mathematical content, is that all?

Because a student has to be pretty damn clever to write well researched/thought-out papers for a religious studies, philosophy or an art history major (again at a top school or ivy). Compare that to a business/finance major at a state school and (1) their quantitative background is comparable if not better due to pre-college background and (2) their research/writing ability far surpasses.

A 10 year old can give their opinion about any painting but cannot solve a single differential equation. Majoring in something which anyone can do does not teach you the skills our society views as productive and beneficial to others.

 
Ace6904][quote][quote:

A 10 year old can give their opinion about any painting but cannot solve a single differential equation. Majoring in something which anyone can do does not teach you the skills our society views as productive and beneficial to others.

And possessing "skills" that are "productive" to society doesn't necessarily mean that a major is the most rigorous, or that those that decide to major in it are any more intelligent, which in and of itself is an arbitrarily defined concept.

I have the upmost respect for STEM academia but I cannot stand it when people try to assert that quantitative majors are somehow morally superior because the careers available upon graduation are more lucrative. How vapid.

Maybe some people study what they like rather than what looks the best to society?

  • prospective banker getting a lot of shit for his major but doesn't regret it at all.
 

I must say... took one elective in Philosophy (Logic) when I was in 2nd year. It was significantly challenging. Not like my Multi-variable calc/Brownian motion/time series classes, but it was alot harder than most classes I've done on the business/finance/accounting side.

‎"Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to become the means by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of other men. Blood, whips and guns or dollars."
 
A 10 year old can give their opinion about any painting but cannot solve a single differential equation. Majoring in something which anyone can do does not teach you the skills our society views as productive and beneficial to others.

1) though I've no direct experience with art history curriculum I am certain (based on experience with other liberal arts majors) it involves more than just giving opinions- hell my essays for AP Art History in high school far surpassed what most (literally most- not all) state school business majors are capable of.

2) As a math graduate, I wonder why you think solving differential equations is in and of itself so impressive/ important? Along with misunderstanding the value of art history majors, you seem to misunderstand a math major's value. hint: it has more to do with (1) critical thinking through proof-based classes and (2) applying it to real world problems - then it has to do with solving equations that are best left to software employing brute-force methods.

 
Seigniorage:

2) As a math graduate, I wonder why you think solving differential equations is in and of itself so impressive/ important? Along with misunderstanding the value of art history majors, you seem to misunderstand a math major's value. hint: it has more to do with (1) critical thinking through proof-based classes and (2) applying it to real world problems - then it has to do with solving equations that are best left to software employing brute-force methods.

This. What do all the upper tier majors everyone's been mentioning have in common? they teach systematic/analytical thinking, how to 'connect dots' ....

ex: If ____ happens to A, what happens to B? How does the change to B effect C, D, and E? In turn how do changes in C,D, and E effect A?

 
therightcoast_:
<span class=keyword_link><a href=/resources/skills/economics/seigniorage target=_blank>Seigniorage</a></span>:

2) As a math graduate, I wonder why you think solving differential equations is in and of itself so impressive/ important? Along with misunderstanding the value of art history majors, you seem to misunderstand a math major's value. hint: it has more to do with (1) critical thinking through proof-based classes and (2) applying it to real world problems - then it has to do with solving equations that are best left to software employing brute-force methods.

This. What do all the upper tier majors everyone's been mentioning have in common? they teach systematic/analytical thinking, how to 'connect dots' ....

ex: If ____ happens to A, what happens to B? How does the change to B effect C, D, and E? In turn how do changes in C,D, and E effect A?

Look Mathematics majors will always be smarter than business majors in terms of raw IQ. The problem is most mathematics majors dress weird and if they don't dress weird chances are they are not good at math.

-Fact

 

I don't normally rank things, but here's my perspective:

Tier 1: Hard Sciences (Math, Engineering, Physics, Comp Sci, Chem, & the like) Tier 1.5: Economics Tier 2: Accounting, Finance, CIS, etc Tier 3: marketing, history, international relations . . . other

 

Liberal arts is a joke.... EXCEPT philosophy which should be tucked right below physics and math disciplines and right above econ and bio. I once met a philosophy and math double major.... smartest guy Ive ever known.

 

This is such a stupid thread. Sure, there are a few majors (maybe psych, marketing) that are easy, but other than that it is 100% personal. Half of the liberal arts kids on here majoring in English and Art History couldn't pass an engineering or physics class to save their lives. On the other hand, half of the STEM majors on here couldn't write a good history paper and have no social skills to top out the participation in many of these classes which accounts for a third of the grade.

 
Black Jack:

This is such a stupid thread. Sure, there are a few majors (maybe psych, marketing) that are easy, but other than that it is 100% personal. Half of the liberal arts kids on here majoring in English and Art History couldn't pass an engineering or physics class to save their lives. On the other hand, half of the STEM majors on here couldn't write a good history paper and have no social skills to top out the participation in many of these classes which accounts for a third of the grade.

@Black Jack I'd SB you if I had any. You're spot on with your comment. For me it doesn't matter where I draw my knowledge from, it could be from a Child Development class or Harvard's infamous Math 55...important point is WTH did you learn? Second, how can you apply what you learned?

 

I'm a little surprised people are ranking accounting and finance in the same tier of difficulty. At my school (given it was a non-target), Finance was basically a glorified applied algebra class where we got a formula sheet and plugged and chugged through some problems. Sure there was some problem solving along the way where profs would twist things from the practice tests/practice problems to confuse people and test our knowledge of various finance concepts to situations, but anyone who was reasonably competent, did the homework, and didn't choke on tests walked out comfortably with an A, which was why I honestly thought it was a waste of a degree to get in undergrad.

My accounting classes still required problem-solving, but there was also a copious amount of information to digest which actually made them pretty rigorous classes. To me, accounting: biology::finance:physics. Bio was really tough for me because I didn't have the attention span to sit there and memorize every muscle in the body, while physics was simpler, despite the more sophisticated math, because it was more about knowing the formulas and then applying them the problems handed to you. So for someone like me, bio was actually harder than physics because I suck at memorizing information.

 
Funniest

All of you shut up because you are all poor and therefore fucking stupid.

So tired of this gay battle of the intellectuals on here Hardest to easiest:

Tier 1. Net worth : $1 billion and above= Smartest

Tier 2.Net worth $ 100 million plus = smart.

Everyone else= Tard.

Yeah I'm a butthurt English/Philosophy/Politics major who was never good @ math.

So what.

Fuck you.

 

Arguing that mathematical studies are more cognitively demanding than nonlinear studies does nothing but reduce the argument to bickering among single-minded fools. Would Davinci consider the pursuit of art any less challenging or noble than the pursuit of engineering? As it stands now, I am not convinced that math is a particularly challenging subject. Some autistic people can solve differential equations in their head and yet fail to hold a decent conversation. Search YouTube for videos of 9-year-olds teaching Calculus. Now, linear thinkers, find me a 9-year-old who can write a Shakespearean play?

 
test_test:

Arguing that mathematical studies are more cognitively demanding than nonlinear studies does nothing but reduce the argument to bickering among single-minded fools. Would Davinci consider the pursuit of art any less challenging or noble than the pursuit of engineering? As it stands now, I am not convinced that math is a particularly challenging subject. Some autistic people can solve differential equations in their head and yet fail to hold a decent conversation. Search YouTube for videos of 9-year-olds teaching Calculus. Now, linear thinkers, find me a 9-year-old who can write a Shakespearean play?

You're doomed to failure.

“Elections are a futures market for stolen property”
 

I'll keep this brief as possible as I can get technical with Art History and Philosophy/Metaphysics. A lot of what has been said is subjective (as is my own comment) so I'll avoid the pissing contest of XYZ Major is better than ABC Major.

Take Art History for example. The knee jerk reaction is that its a useless major and should be avoided at all costs unless you're a Latte sipping hipster. Hell the President called out Art History majors (and issued an apology to my former professor).

I didn't major in Art History, only took an intro course for which I am thankful for. For starters you are forced to look at a painting or other form of art from more than one vantage point. Simply commenting on the colors isn't enough. Some of the most renowned classical works have many layers which have even more layers.

Why is this important? It teaches you to pay attention to the nitty gritty details. Well why the fuck do I care?

Ever read a prospectus all the way through? I would venture to guess not. Guess who did and raked in billions?

Dr. Michael Burry

He read into the details of the very financial products investors simply glossed over. Those investors that lost big in the mortgage meltdown did so for the simple fact that they focused on the observable and didn't bother scrutinizing what they were investing in with greater attention to detail.

Another useful skill gained is your ability to question, research, and analyze art work. This is important because in my current role as a Business Development Analyst I am tasked with finding opportunities for investments and M&A to grow market share or take advantage of trending opportunities within the O&G space. Without going into specifics I was able to use the research skills I gained and my ability to analyze the most mundane of data to create an acquisition thesis for my company which is slowly making its rounds and drawing attention.

The above are just two skills I've gained from one course. I've rambled on enough but in closing, you can teach someone to model, perform a DCF Analysis, or put together an investment thesis...what you can't do is teach people to think, draw their OWN conclusions, and develop their OWN ideas.

 
RedRage:

I'll keep this brief as possible as I can get technical with Art History and Philosophy/Metaphysics. A lot of what has been said is subjective (as is my own comment) so I'll avoid the pissing contest of XYZ Major is better than ABC Major.

Take Art History for example. The knee jerk reaction is that its a useless major and should be avoided at all costs unless you're a Latte sipping hipster. Hell the President called out Art History majors (and issued an apology to my former professor).

I didn't major in Art History, only took an intro course for which I am thankful for. For starters you are forced to look at a painting or other form of art from more than one vantage point. Simply commenting on the colors isn't enough. Some of the most renowned classical works have many layers which have even more layers.

Why is this important? It teaches you to pay attention to the nitty gritty details. Well why the fuck do I care?

Ever read a prospectus all the way through? I would venture to guess not. Guess who did and raked in billions?

Dr. Michael Burry

He read into the details of the very financial products investors simply glossed over. Those investors that lost big in the mortgage meltdown did so for the simple fact that they focused on the observable and didn't bother scrutinizing what they were investing in with greater attention to detail.

Another useful skill gained is your ability to question, research, and analyze art work. This is important because in my current role as a Business Development Analyst I am tasked with finding opportunities for investments and M&A to grow market share or take advantage of trending opportunities within the O&G space. Without going into specifics I was able to use the research skills I gained and my ability to analyze the most mundane of data to create an acquisition thesis for my company which is slowly making its rounds and drawing attention.

The above are just two skills I've gained from one course. I've rambled on enough but in closing, you can teach someone to model, perform a DCF Analysis, or put together an investment thesis...what you can't do is teach people to think, draw their OWN conclusions, and develop their OWN ideas.

What a stretch man..

“Elections are a futures market for stolen property”
 

Esuric thanks for the insightful comment and for adding value to this discussion.

Say whatever you want but the CEOs of many major firms, Finance and non-Finance have stated that they are more concerned with soft skills and work ethic more so than your college, major, etc. Now obviously I'm not saying that you can major in Women's Studies and end up working at CERN but what I am saying is that those who don't let their majors define who they are and are focused more on what they learned and how they can apply those skills to the work world...far more likely to succeed.

 

I wouldn't put Econ in the top category, it really depends on track (ie IPE vs Macro vs Econometrics). I'd consider Chemistry to probably be on the tougher end.

Jack: They’re all former investment bankers who were laid off from that economic crisis that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have zero real world skills, but God they work hard. -30 Rock
 

Top (most time consuming in any school )

Engineering, math, physics, chemistry, computer science

Middle( depends on school) Finance, econ, accounting , biology, geology

bottom psychology, sociology, management, business, arts, english, human resources, basket weaving, kinetics,information systems,anything computer related that isn't computer sci and anything that isn't in the first two ( i consider stat/actuary in the math category)

 
ibdhopeful:
how is comp sci on the same level as physics / math? lol
Well, at Illinois, CS is an engineering degree that serves as a cross between Theoretical Math and Comp. E. We had the same required math and physics curricula as the other engineers, and a double-major in Math wasn't an acceptable substitute for an application sequence- since so many of our courses overlapped with the math department, a double-major in Math was easier than taking five courses in a field outside CS.

Different schools handle CS differently- some put it in engineering; some put it in LAS, but in general, a CS degree that goes deep into theory, software engineering, compilers, and hardware design is going to have the same quantitative complexity as an engineering degree. There will be a little bit of a heavier focus on logic, proofs, and problem solving and a little less on applied math/ differential equations, but it's a very similar degree to Comp. E at the end of the day- it's just that we're doing proofs on algorithms while you guys are taking Theoretical & Applied Mechanics.

In any case, I think I know who the econ majors are in this thread.

 

I'd put economics and engineering below math and physics, but above finance, accounting, biology, geology. I suppose I tend to think of economics as applied math and engineering as applied physics. Not sure where comp sci and chem would fit in (certainly not the bottom tier though).

Also, I think the ranking is a bit different if we are using the major as a proxy to judge 'intrinsic intelligence' versus 'tolerance for being a workhorse/grinder'.

My bias is toward the former, since that's what I value more, but others may feel differently. It may also be correlated with whether someone leans toward IBD vs S&T (probably obvious which one I'm partial to).

 

Comp Sci is very frustrating (if you haven't been doing forever) and a TON of time. Physics is def brutal as well. I'd say math isn't as rough as engineering in that the project aspect isn't there; you can fudge your proofs sometimes in math but if you cant get a combustion valve to calibrate, your fucked. Biology, chem, or any other "pre-med" major is rough, especially seeing that it's worthless if you're not going to land at least a 3.5. I'd say the same goes with finance and accounting due to it not be that great if your not pulling a 3.5.

Ace all your PE interview questions with the WSO Private Equity Prep Pack: http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/guide/private-equity-interview-prep-questions
 

I really think you have majors that are quantitative or not quantitative.... either involve solving complex problems or don't. It really isn't that productive to compare engineering, math, physics, chem, etc because they can all range from not that difficult to levels that only phDs can understand.

 

I am biology and finance....and biology is definitely harder (atleast at my school... not sure about wharton)

and... in no way shape or form should econ be in the top half

Very Top Biomedical Engineering

Top other engineering, physics, math

Top Mid Biology, CS, Chem

Mid Finance, Econ, Accounting, English,

Lower Phsychology, Philosophy

Joke Marketing, Anthropology, Women and Gender Studies

 
PuppyBackedSecurities:
I am biology and finance....and biology is definitely harder (atleast at my school... not sure about wharton)

and... in no way shape or form should econ be in the top half

Very Top Biomedical Engineering

Top other engineering, physics, math

Top Mid Biology, CS, Chem

Mid Finance, Econ, Accounting, English,

Lower Phsychology, Philosophy

Joke Marketing, Anthropology, Women and Gender Studies

I wouldn't put philosophy so low. Trying taking a couple courses in Symbolic Logic and lemme know what you think. CS majors know what I'm talking about. Philosophy is a joke only if you read philosophy like literature and submit endless papers. If the class focuses on argument rehearsals be it written or spoken, the difficulty greatly increases.

 
you can fudge your proofs sometimes in math but if you cant get a combustion valve to calibrate, your fucked.
I disagree. I can't imagine anyone passing an analysis or abstract algebra sequence by "fudging" proofs (at least at any half way reputable school). Besides, (pure) math is something that requires a deep understanding, whereas engineering can be rote application of well-established techniques (that said I'd still prefer to hire engineering majors over most math majors).

Concerning Econ: It really depends on the university/professor/classes. At Penn, they had a visiting professor who recently left LEH teach a course on economics of banking. Apparently she threw out the tetbook and started teaching DSGE models and graduate-level theory. The students even did projects implementing their own DSGE models. Or a class in adv. econometrics using the Graduate-level Greene textbook. Or Game Theory (which I found a bit challenging when I was in college). But on the other hand, one could also load up on the easier econ electives such as international development.

 

economics wasn't hard, econometrics was though!

engineering should be up the top, so should bio and chem.

"After you work on Wall Street it’s a choice, would you rather work at McDonalds or on the sell-side? I would choose McDonalds over the sell-side.” - David Tepper
 

If you are a math major, symbolic logic is pretty much what you learn in any introductory proofs class, in the first week haha. It's really not that complex imo.

Jack: They’re all former investment bankers who were laid off from that economic crisis that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have zero real world skills, but God they work hard. -30 Rock
 
Revsly:
If you are a math major, symbolic logic is pretty much what you learn in any introductory proofs class, in the first week haha. It's really not that complex imo.

Umm... I think you are confusing a simple introduction to logic that covers basic tables and trees and the transitive/identity rules with a course that covers everything from truth tables to trees to derivations to advanced predicate logic.

 

^^^ Yes. In CS and Mathematics, we call that course discrete math. It is a 100-level course that's worth two credit hours, and wasn't as difficult as most engineering, physics, and math courses I've taken, despite Illinois' being arguably among the most rigorous discrete math courses in the country. However, it is pretty foundational for data structures, algorithms, and any sort of discussion about efficient software design.

 
IlliniProgrammer:
^^^ Yes. In CS and Mathematics, we call that course discrete math. It is a 100-level course that's worth two credit hours, and wasn't as difficult as most engineering, physics, and math courses I've taken, despite Illinois' being arguably among the most rigorous in the country. However, it is pretty foundational for data structures, algorithms, and any sort of discussion about efficient software design.

Yes, traditional enlightenment philosophy has some quantitative components to it, but I don't know how many philosophy majors believe something can be proven these days (other than the fact that you can't prove anything.) If you don't accept that basic concept, it's hard for philosophy to be very quantitative if it's trying to deal with reality.

If you are a skeptic about knowledge, that's perfectly fine. Even logic comes up short as Wittgenstein showed in his difficult texts. I don't think philosophy is very quantitative outside of logic. That being said, quantitative material isn't always difficult. Pick up some texts on the philosophy of mind or language and it's pretty evident, the "science" of arguments is just as intense as other subjects.

 
If you are a math major, symbolic logic is pretty much what you learn in any introductory proofs class, in the first week haha. It's really not that complex imo.
I assumed by "intro proofs class" you meant one's first semester of Analysis or Abstract Algebra. In which case that is patently false. I realize some math departments have a freshman math seminar for majors- maybe that's what you're talking about? In which I agree- it's not hard nor is it designed to be hard.
 

i loled when finance/econ was put on the same level as english , and english above philosophy.

hardest Biomed E (i would kno, i wanted to pre-med with that shit)

very difficult Math, other Engineerings, CS, Chem, Physics

difficult Accounting, Econ, Finance, Biology

average Philosophy, Psychology, Geology

Easy English, other business majors (marketing, management), sociology, anthropology, early childhood studies lol etc.

 

I was exaggerating perhaps when I said "Intro", but I am talking about Symbolic Logic, not Introduction to Logic, I took both. But after courses in Mathematics and Comp Sci, it was on a much simpler level than those two subjects, my school did not have a fantastic quantitative philosophy side (as far as I know) so maybe that played a role, but I still would refuse to talk about Math/CS and Logic as being on the same level as far as difficulty.

Jack: They’re all former investment bankers who were laid off from that economic crisis that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have zero real world skills, but God they work hard. -30 Rock
 

Given that all grades are given on a curve, and in the end earning an A is less 'mastering' all the material than doing so to a higher level than your peers, it's tough to say what's 'harder'. I personally enjoyed the critical thinking and logic of math courses, but from liberal arts requirements in philosophy and writing saw the frustrating side of those subject areas (could never imagine having been a philosophy major, would probably choke in frustration at the useless crap no offense).

I also don't find accounting/finance to be intellectually tough, but can be a grind especially with classrooms full of overachievers, a few small mistakes can screw you from a top mark, which makes them artificially challenging.

 

it's hard to state which program is THE toughest, as each one requires unique skills to learn the material well, not to mention that you need to factor in what grades we're talking about here (e.g. I would say getting an A+ average in English is harder to accomplish than an A+ average in Math at your average college simply because essays are graded on a much more subjective level, while it's probably much easier to grind your way through university with straight B's in English than in Math)

I don't remember where I read this, but a nice intuitive way to gauge how "difficult" a program really is is to look at the transfers that occur amongst the students at a school (and more specifically, which programs the students transfer TO, not from). There are many other factors (such as students simply not liking their original major) that influence this but I find it to be a pretty reliable test that also incorporates the idiosyncrasies of a particular school. The downside is that because transfers amongst certain majors are almost nonexistent, sometimes it's impossible to compare 2 majors (e.g. Accounting and Biology), even if you assume transitivity, which may in weird instances be negated.

For example, at my school, I find that many students in Engineering who can't survive in the "harder" Engineering programs tend to switch to the "easier" ones (or leave engineering completely), and the ones who can't survive the "easier" ones tend to transfer to programs like Econ (my school's econ dept is shit), since it deals with much less technical stuff (at your average college) without completely eliminating it. Students who were poor performers in a previous major tend to switch into the easier programs offered within a department/faculty. E.g. you almost never see anyone transferring from an applied stats program (or something similar) to Pure Math, etc.

 

Hic enim qui omnis consequatur. Qui id quos dolorem accusantium non.

Cupiditate nulla magnam molestiae enim. Deserunt quam officia assumenda natus reiciendis. Porro odit ut voluptatibus non nesciunt reprehenderit natus. Et sapiente rem dolor atque dolore pariatur dolores sunt.

Dolorum nostrum nisi et animi eligendi. Aliquid harum corrupti laboriosam deleniti aut repudiandae pariatur. Rerum accusantium nisi sed qui. Et adipisci quod illum. Excepturi nihil perferendis veritatis error esse aliquid.

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (145) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
9
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
10
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”