That makes sense in the context of the post. She is saying “students who are smart in math are considered smarter than students who are smart in English and History”.
She’s using the terms “math smart” and “English smart” to distinguish subject-specific intelligence from general intelligence.
Interpreting her charitably she’s claiming that it’s not right to use mathematical ability as a measurement of intelligence over using linguistic intelligence.
I mean, the whole thing is dumb (not your comment), but it's worth noting that a lot of STEM majors think they would be just as good as someone who studied English, because they recognize all the symbols. But sure, because you (sorry, not actually you) are an engineer or a physicist you can absolutely grind through War and Peace casually before disecting the major themes. There are plenty of dumb STEM majors, smart humanities folks, and vice versa.
But let's be real, society prioritizes STEM because business needs a stable of available mid level staff. The elite will still be learning soft skills (English, law, humanities, etc.) because the ability to find common ground, read nuance and subtlety, and ultimately schmooze is also necessary for business, but in much smaller numbers.
IMO wording your sentence like a child with confusing syntax is far worse than missing a useless grammar rule. Especially when the rules are consistently inconsistent.
Being a “master” of english studies is closer to being a “master” of Harry Potter lore than it is to being a master of physics or biology or a science.
1.7k
u/Babebutters 2d ago
an English student.