"why are stem students considered smarter than arts students?"

because they are

people tend to take so much offense to this statement, understandably so. it does come off as demeaning and diminishing their work. let me start off by saying this

the majority of the points i see discussed during this argument are, for some reason, about which field is more important for humanity, which always baffles me, because that is a whole different argument altogether. it is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand

let’s clear one misconception up first. i don’t believe that exceptional scientists or mathematicians are revered and respected more than exceptional artists. think of the most recognizable and well known figures in all of mankind. da vinci, michelangelo, beethoven, mozart, picasso: nobody arguing in good faith will ever claim that artists can’t be talented, or influential

the reality is that greatness isn’t limited by the field you’re in, at least not until you start hitting the leagues of generational talent. greatness is greatness. a mozart is a mozart. a ramanujan is a ramanujan. once you reach that level, comparing fields becomes pointless

but that’s not what most people are talking about when they ask why stem students are considered smarter than arts students

they’re talking about averages

and on average, at least in countries like india, stem tends to attract students who have already survived a far more competitive selection process

this isn’t because art is worthless, nor because literature, history, philosophy, or sociology are easy subjects when studied seriously. the issue is that the barriers to entry are completely different

to end up in engineering, medicine, mathematics, or the sciences, a student usually spends years dealing with highly standardized examinations, competitive entrance tests, coaching institutes, and academic environments that relentlessly filter people out. whether that system is healthy is a separate discussion. the point is that it exists

if two students are standing in front of you, and one has cleared several rounds of difficult quantitative examinations while the other entered a field with substantially lower academic barriers, people naturally assume the former is more academically capable

the assumption may not always be true, but it isn’t irrational

another uncomfortable reality is that many students don’t choose arts because they’re deeply passionate about the humanities. many choose it because it is perceived as the easier route, and maybe im being harsh when i say this, but time and time again have i seen people with no real ambitions or goals, people who’s life revolves around comfort and fun, choose arts because they want the easiest, most lax life possible. you might argue thats its okay to not have your life planned out at 16, and i’d agree, but you need to acknowlege that in a country like india, where the pressure to succeed is so crushing, people able to meander around is an enormous privelege. and i think the kids who are driven and focused at such a young age deserve to reap the social status of being considered the same

there is also a socioeconomic dimension to this discussion that people rarely acknowledge. among wealthier families, it is not uncommon to see students choose arts with the security of knowing that their future is already partially insulated by family resources, connections, or inherited opportunities. meanwhile, many middle-class students see engineering or medicine as one of the few reliable paths to upward mobility. for them, stem isn’t merely an academic preference. it’s a high-stakes competition with real and life defining consequences

when people say stem students are smarter, what they’re often noticing isn’t the intrinsic value of the subjects themselves. they’re noticing the intensity of the filtering mechanism behind them

whether that filtering mechanism measures intelligence perfectly is another matter entirely

it probably doesn’t

it rewards discipline, test-taking ability, consistency, tolerance for pressure, and quantitative reasoning. those traits overlap with intelligence, but they are not identical to it

that’s why the statement “stem students are smarter” is simultaneously too simplistic and not completely baseless

it’s wrong if interpreted as a universal truth about every individual

it’s understandable if interpreted as an observation about how different educational systems select and sort students