Random inchoerent rants vol. 3: Biochemistry is pain


Apparently, this is supposed to mean something in some way. It's almost like modern art.

This will be shorter than usual. One would think, since I basically live for biology, that I preferred biochemistry to regular chemistry. False. I’m not a lover of general chemistry, but it’s not bad. Organic chemistry is incredibly more boring, and biochemistry is PAINFULLY boring. I don’t know exactly why, the more it gets close to biology, the more I’m bored by chemistry. Well, it actually has to do with the fact that it becomes increasingly mnemonical and decreasingly logical along the way. There are other disciplines I love that require a lot of memory, like taxonomy – but in that case, we’re talking about things I love, and thus it’s easier for me to see in them the beauty and the logic. I’m sorry to admit that, because biochemistry is of course more and more important every day, but I just don’t give a fuck about proteins and their shapes and names; if I have to study biology at a molecular level, then molecular biology and genetics are much more interesting and beautiful.

I’m NOT complaining about the fact that I’m forced to study biochemistry, because every biologist must know the basics of this discipline, among others. I’m just glad that the professional path that I’d like to follow (ecology/biodiversity research – yeah, I will die of starvation) won’t probably require me to be an expert biochemist. I’m more interested in the organisms themselves, in their diversity, anatomy and in the mechanisms by which they evolve and survive in their environment, than in the details about the thousands of proteic gears that form their cells.


4 comments on “Random inchoerent rants vol. 3: Biochemistry is pain

  1. Vincenzo Maccarrone (Falce) says:

    That’s actually a problem of the whole Italian University system, that does not live enough freedom of choice of the subjects and modules that a student can take. I hate to admit that concerning this field the anglosaxon system is better.

    • Yeah, I dunno… as I’ve said, every knid of biologist should know the basics of bichemistry (and ecology, and genetics, and zoology, and botany, and molecular biology…) but it is true that the course I’m attending is certainly too detailed for what I’ve intention to do in the future. They should probably give you the possibility to choose your path since the first year, and to follow the courses accordingly to the area of interest.

  2. Vincenzo Maccarrone (Falce) says:

    (I would of course say “leave enough freedom” not “live.”)

  3. Vincenzo Maccarrone (Falce) says:

    For example, my girlfriend in UK could choose her modules from the 1st year, thus she’s actually building her module’s path according to her preferences.
    Maybe the best solution would be a sort of mix: put some compulsory courses at the 1st year and then leave freedom of choice to the studentes. Of course then comes the problem to define what is really necessary and what is not, but I think that it’s possible to overcome it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s