I think I may have discovered why I’m doing so well in certain classes and so badly in others.

The realization came to me as I was reviewing various chemistry study guides online, trying to puzzle out how Le Châtelier’s Principle relates to volume and temperature (I understood how it related to substances’ concentration; that was the obvious part). As I looked at various pages on a Google search, I found that the explanations could clearly be divided into two types: those which described a specific reaction and then extrapolated to a general explanation of the principle (inductive), and those which started with a general description and then applied it to specific reactions (deductive).

It seems that I’m more inclined toward deductive reasoning, for the latter sort of explanation was the one which seemed “clearest” to me. It makes sense, given what I know about myself; according to Myers-Briggs-compatible personality tests, I’m an INTP personality type, and many descriptions of iNtuitive Thinking (NT) personalities mention a tendency toward deductive reasoning.

That also explains why I’m doing so well in the classes I’m doing well in, and so badly in those I’m having difficulty with. Theory of Computing and Music Theory are rather theoretical and generalized classes (as the names suggest!) and pose little difficulty for an intuitive, deductive thinker. The same generally goes for Statistics, at least in the class that I’m in: most of the discussion explains a general concept and then goes on to apply it to specific examples from real life. It’s in Chemistry and Data Structures— both classes which could be taught in a deductive manner, but which generally are more suited to inductive methods— that I’m having the most difficulty…