As far as the cost return of the discipline is concerned, the two are worlds apart. My undergraduate major is a theoretical subject-mathematics, which is the basic subject of modern science. All science and engineering majors are developed on the basis of mathematics. There is no doubt about the importance of this major, but I want to tell you the fact that most of the mathematical knowledge used in science and engineering now is 17 and 18 century mathematical knowledge (mainly represented by calculus). Learning mathematics is not only time-consuming and brain-consuming, but also it is not easy to push the research forward. Often, even if there is a theoretical discovery, there is a great probability that you will not see any practical application of the results in your lifetime. If you are lucky, you may have practical applications in the next 100 years, or you may just be a mathematician thinking for himself. An undergraduate admitted to the graduate school of Wuhan University said that the graduate students majoring in mathematics in Wuhan University couldn't even find a girlfriend (although he was telling a joke, it reflected that people couldn't see the real benefits of studying this subject, and more people studied basic subjects in the United States, especially mathematics. Because of the reality of Americans, this subject was rarely studied by young people in the United States, so they had to absorb excellent foreign undergraduate graduates majoring in mathematics to study for graduate students).
In addition to basic theoretical sciences such as mathematics and physics, there are also liberal arts majors such as literature, history and philosophy. Generally speaking, the social return is also very low. When I was a graduate student ten years ago, I found a phenomenon in various schools. My school is the School of Economics and Management, and the parking spaces at the school gate are full of all kinds of cars, most of which are Passat and Buick Regal. The better car is Cadillac, and the better car is the million-dollar Land Rover in finidi, England. Moreover, like humanities and journalism colleges, teachers in class * * drive tens of thousands of cars in Chang 'an class at the door. Better cars are rare. Cars were not so popular then as they are now. Ten years ago, it would be nice to have a scooter. The cars of teachers in schools of electrical engineering and architecture are not worse than those in schools of economics and management. A glimpse of the whole leopard shows that although these teachers work in the same university, the income difference is indeed not small. If we go back 20 or 30 years and give the teachers of literature, history and philosophy and basic subjects another chance to re-enter the university and choose their major (most of the teachers at that time were college students in the 1980s and 1990s), would they still choose this major?
Compared with theoretical disciplines, applied disciplines have natural social practice advantages. When knowledge is used, it will soon produce social benefits and will naturally pay off.
In my opinion, children from ordinary families (ordinary families account for at least 80% of society) are not recommended to study theoretical subjects, because the income they earn after graduating from college is greater than the cost their families pay for your college education. In short, such a major is not suitable for children with poor family circumstances and is not cost-effective.