/random insertion/
Jungian Functions Test Results
|
Personality Test by SimilarMinds.com
Moving on to the present. I've just got back all my results, I would say most of them are not very surprising, just my normal standard I guess, but IM2 is good, and physics is bad. Oh wait why am I talking about results here nobody will care about it anyway...but that goes the same for everything else in this blog. Anyway, the result is not the end. Nothing is the end but, maybe, death. I have my future laid in front of me, full of possibilities and opportunities. This EOY doesn't say anything, but during this period I suddenly have an increased interest in some things. I actually managed to see more clearly what I truly enjoy doing and possibly what I'm going to do in my future.
Firstly, despite not doing so well in physics this time, I'm still choosing it in JC. Not only because I feel not much interest in studying biology (I actually got quite decent grades for bio this time, same as my chem actually, and I'm like whaaat how is this acceptable), but I do like physics, especially modern physics. Not that interested in mechanics etc though, but to study modern physics I have to master classical physics first, just like how I've to put in efforts for LA in order to do KI. But I think going KI is hopeless now, since my LA still can't make it.
Anyway, I don't dislike bio. I just find all the memorising a painful process. I can only remember things that make sense. Memorising mere figures and specific names is really not to my liking. In contrast, physics makes sense of things, which is precisely what I love. It is the most fundamental science and requires the most academic rigour. Though I'm probably not going to be a physicist in the future, learning the concepts is a joy.
So what will I become in the future? To be honest, I don't know, but certainly related to the physical sciences. I think chemistry may be more suitable for me, and oh I love chemistree. I've checked out a couple of forums online comparing chemistry and physics. The conclusions I got are:
#1. Physics is a lot, a lot of maths. Well, maths is the language of physics. Many commented that when you go to advance level, you have the first few lines originating from theories and the rest is all maths. I am okay with mathematics, but without theories maths mean little to me. In fact I think mathematics is a very very condensed form of theory represented by symbols, and because they are so condensed people cannot get some of the idea behind, but they don't need to since all we need is to be able to manipulate them. Too much maths make me dizzy. I admit I'm not the genius type of people so I don't think I have the brain. Honestly.
#2. All of the physicists now are devoted into that one theory--the string theory. String theory is an awesome theory, but it cannot be confirmed. We can't even understand quantum mechanics well enough, and now we are trying to delve into forming a theory of everything? I'm a bit sceptical about whether we as humble human beings will be able to contemplate the deepest mysteries of the universe. And when will we reach the end? Even if string theory is successful, that we are able to explain black holes, the big bang, parallel worlds and so on, we will then have to ask even more fundamental questions. We will have to question the principals underlying the explanations, and so on. It is just like how we question matter: First we know atoms make up matter, and sub-atomic particles make up atoms, and elementary particles make up sub-atomic particles, and strings make up these particles. So what make up these strings? Where is the 11th dimension? What happens before the before of beginning of big bang? You see, it never ends. Although I agree it is always good to delve deeper, string theory now is dangerously evolving into metaphysics, which is philosophy, which is reasonable because philosophy deals with things we can't be sure with because we have no way to test it--the same situation confronting string theory. Seeing how the trend goes, I don't think we can go on to solve the even more fundamental questions. We have reached our limits, as humans, as three/four dimensional beings. I may be wrong, but I feel that it's the case.
#3. And thus, chemistry is better for me, because it is definitely more practical, it requires less maths, and it is more concept oriented. Sometimes it is not easy to draw a line between physics and chemistry.
#4. I shall never be an engineer
Maybe talking about the future is too early for a pre-JC student. I will see how it goes.
And as an INTP I realised that I'm beginning to be interested in philosophy, but it kinds of bug me when there is no definite answer. However the process of thinking is enjoyable. I don't know much about this field yet, maybe I can read up on this. (This is reason I want to do KI in JC)
Lastly, as the doom of JC subject combination draws near, I'm starting to get anxious over the contrasting subject to choose. Just choose econ I heard you say, but I HATE ECONOMICS and I know for sure that choosing it will inflict two years of intense agony. Just no. If I can't go KI, I really don't know what to choose. Definitely not ELL or Eng lit or history. Maybe CSC or CLL? But I'm not inclined to literature, I know it is interesting but I'm the lit type of person, and CSC is IH all over again but in Chinese, which makes it better but the content will still be things I dislike. And if I choose other than geog/KI/econ I can't do SMTP or GATE :( Geog? Idk, but I've already lost out two years. And geog requires a lot of mugging. I hate to mug, and I don't like human geog. I guess I will make the choice after listening to some of the trial-lectures.
No comments:
Post a Comment