Gregory Wygoni
The Silhouette
Should you fall in love during your undergrad?
Such a question could extend to the generalization of whether one should fall in love at all. The argument goes as follows that when you fall (or rise) in love, you will do incredible things. You will become happiest you have ever been. You will share yourself with your partner. And you become a better person because they are better themselves. Contrarily, s you realize they don’t love you, they break your heart, you become phlegmatic and desensitized, and love – that feeling of happiness and satisfaction that you could be better because of someone else – is thrown out the window.
Love, then, becomes a question of uncertainty and fear. ‘What if it doesn’t work’ brings with it vulnerabilities and insecurities. You see the end. You see sadness. But oh, what if it did? What if it worked and we were in love indeed!
Such arguments do not necessarily apply to the undergraduate young adult though. Albeit it difficult to define a reason to attend undergrad at all (paying thousands of dollars for something contained in a Wikipedia article is hard to economically support), it is an important time for someone to develop individually and to realize what they want to do. During undergrad, a person often becomes whole in their messy transition to adulthood. It allows time for reflection to better understand themselves.
Yet when one inhales the airs of love, they suddenly become enwrapped in another person. Their concerns and priorities are at times put aside to serve someone else. And though this teaches the person admirable qualities of selflessness, most relationships do not last. The person becomes happy for a while, and then the relationship fizzles out or becomes a heart-ache. And here in this gnawing absence lies the question: is it better to end the heartache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to?
And I reply no. When you are young, you are malleable, and the growth you can receive with someone, if they are truly right, is immeasurable. If they break your heart, or you theirs, there is much time left to rebuild and restructure.
Even better, during undergrad there is little to rebuild, besides perhaps your beerpong table or your GPA. Perhaps the strongest argument for support of love in your undergrad is that it may work, and look how happy you can be.
Gregory Wygoni
The Silhouette
“Science” was dubbed the word of the year in 2013. And though this may an impressive achievement for the human race, especially considering that the runner ups were “snuffalgapus” and “bieberlicious”, one cannot commend ourselves too generously. We still have a long way to go.
For example, let us go on a short walk from MUSC to BSB. Once there, realize you are in the science sector: chemistry, biology, physics. But yet, there is a lingering feeling that something is missing, Geology? Perhaps, but I argue there is something else, something deeper.
These science students, McMaster’s finest in the most pragmatic of arts, will not have the science that allows all what they learned to become possible. It is the magic glue that holds things together. Okay, it isn’t mathematics, which is the basis for what I am arguing, but instead computer science. Software and hardware are behind every innovation. You want some nuclear magnetic resonance, read the software output. You like polymerase chain reaction, try automation. Computer science, and the principles that underlie it, lay the foundation for much of modern science. It is not a difficult concept to debate then that digital literacy has never been more important. It empowers you to make what you want, and have the necessary skills to contribute positively in your field.
Yet most science students - not even to speak of the humanities, social sciences, or health study students - lack programming skills. Even our math majors can barely string together a valid function.
What is worse, the computer science students who are learning how to code are doing it perfunctorily. They worry only about output, rather than the language. The current paradigm for computer science in university is not different for any other program, do what they want, do well, and don’t be creative in your approaches. Such terrible practices are then translated to industry.
These habits also permeate through the online learning of CodeAcademy and the like. They teach you the basic format and language constructs, and that is all. You complete the exercises, all in a daze, and then wonder what is next. It is like learning the alphabet and thinking you can write a book.
The fact of the matter is that most students don’t know how to program, and those that do only know it robotically. This author does not evade these categorizations. To know how to program well, to appreciate the beauty of a language, to use its syntactic sugar well, is an art. To have great test coverage, to be efficient and write simple code is an ever expanding hallway in your worst nightmare.
Is there a reason most students do not learn how to code? Yes, because they believe it to be hard. If this is any counterpoint, I was able to learn. Secondly, as to why students who do know how to code, code poorly, I can only proffer the argument of patience. The art is long, and time is short. Most students think once they learn the alphabet they can put together Brave New World, yet the same is not for “Hello World.” The only solution I offer is teach computer science early, teach it well with as many different ways as possible, and wait.
Good stuff is waiting behind our semicolons.
