Are the Humanities Doomed?

[dismalist]

A hundred doctors telling me I have cancer isn't as useful as one who can actually treat it.

A hundred doctors telling me I have cancer isn't as useful as one doctor telling me I don't have cancer when s/he's correct! [FTFY :-)]

Science is not a democracy, at least not in the long run.

[Wahoo Redux]

What about some of those other fringe things, like physics and chemistry? It would seem the kind of "science" you "support" isn't determined so much by how much evidence it has behind it as whether it has some sort of warm fuzzy connection for non-scientists.
The whole idea of science is that what matters is whether it fits with reality, not how much (or even if) people like it.

Seriously, science doesn't care how many "fans" it has, but whether it helps explain (and more importantly, predict) the way the world works.

Are you trying to be a jerk, Marshy?

I just found it really weird to identify branches of science by some sort of "likes". Especially when the focus seemed to be on a lot of observational science. A hundred doctors telling me I have cancer isn't as useful as one who can actually treat it.

I still don't know what you are on about.

Geology is cool because I took it as an undergrad and it fascinated me.

Astronomy is simply cool----I'm talking on the level of a subscription to Astronomy Magazine.  Very layman stuff.  Just fascinating to think of the wonders of the universe and the things being observed.

There is no subtext there. 

[Stockmann]

But I am a big fan of science, particularly astronomy and geology, and really appreciate what engineers and bio-scientists do for us.  I have yet to meet a humanities person who "sneers" at science----I can't imagine anyone who would unless politically motivated (ex. COVID and climate science) who are not generally humanities types.  By and large, humanities types are big believes in global climate change and the dangers of viruses.  We support these scientists.

To clarify, my bad experiences are not hostility towards the results of science, but more like hostility towards STEM academics - so not hostility in the sense that creationists or climate change deniers or antivaxers might be hostile to certain types of scientific knowledge, but more along the lines of thinking Sheldon Cooper would be one of the nicer and more personable scientists or, esp., thinking that scientific research doesn't involve creativity or imagination.

On the other hand, I have been insulted to my face a number of times by STEM folks, sometimes accidentally, and a number of times on these boards.  This is not hyperbole...

I don't doubt it, and I'm sorry. There are plenty of STEM people with bad attitudes, hostility towards the humanities, etc, unfortunately. There are people on both sides attacking those who should be their allies.

Your commentary sounds just like your typical fight among family members: it's always the other side's fault.

I think it more like academics are more or less on the same ship (but some much closer to the lifeboats than others), heading towards an iceberg. On board, some are actually trying to steer away from the iceberg, some are loudly demanding the iceberg move out of the ship's path, others are pleading with the iceberg to do so, some are proclaiming that, because epistemological diversity, if everyone agrees with them the iceberg doesn't exist, the iceberg will no longer exist. Some say that, if they're given enough grant money, they'll figure out a way to sink the iceberg. Others are fighting over how to re-arrange the deck chairs, others are trying to figure out how to optimize lifeboat capacity, and some are drilling holes in the hull - some of these brought their own inflatable lifeboats and are running some insurance scam, others are true believers in hole-drilling, are convinced any water getting into the ship will just drain out of the holes they're drilling, and would throw overboard anyone who says drilling holes is part of the problem. Some have given up and are gorging themselves full on the ship's dwindling supplies, others are trying to figure out how to teach the fishes, and some musicians keep playing though no one's listening.

[Wahoo Redux]

I like the Titanic analogy.  And I would like to add that several passengers are convinced that the best way to reach New York is just to keep steering the same course, which is marginally better than the passengers who do not seem to have noticed that the ship is sinking.

[Stockmann]

I like the Titanic analogy.  And I would like to add that several passengers are convinced that the best way to reach New York is just to keep steering the same course, which is marginally better than the passengers who do not seem to have noticed that the ship is sinking.

Some of the passengers have been very careful not to see the ship is sinking. Some passengers are following in the footsteps of the philosopher Calvin (the one with the tiger) who, when asked by his teacher what state he lived in, replied "Denial" and the teacher then said "Well, I can't argue with that."

[mleok]

To clarify, my bad experiences are not hostility towards the results of science, but more like hostility towards STEM academics - so not hostility in the sense that creationists or climate change deniers or antivaxers might be hostile to certain types of scientific knowledge, but more along the lines of thinking Sheldon Cooper would be one of the nicer and more personable scientists or, esp., thinking that scientific research doesn't involve creativity or imagination.

Don't get me started with humanities professors who seem to think that their courses are the only ones capable to teaching students critical thinking.

[Wahoo Redux]

To clarify, my bad experiences are not hostility towards the results of science, but more like hostility towards STEM academics - so not hostility in the sense that creationists or climate change deniers or antivaxers might be hostile to certain types of scientific knowledge, but more along the lines of thinking Sheldon Cooper would be one of the nicer and more personable scientists or, esp., thinking that scientific research doesn't involve creativity or imagination.

Don't get me started with humanities professors who seem to think that their courses are the only ones capable to teaching students critical thinking.

Who says that, for instance?

[downer]

My experience is that it is very difficult to teach college students how to think critically if they don't already have the skill.

You can help them label various moves so it is easier to explain what they mean, and help them sharpen their skills. They may learn connections between different ways of thinking critically. But you can't make a profound change in their abilities.

I mostly think of critical thinking courses as a way to filter out students who can't think critically.

[mleok]

To clarify, my bad experiences are not hostility towards the results of science, but more like hostility towards STEM academics - so not hostility in the sense that creationists or climate change deniers or antivaxers might be hostile to certain types of scientific knowledge, but more along the lines of thinking Sheldon Cooper would be one of the nicer and more personable scientists or, esp., thinking that scientific research doesn't involve creativity or imagination.

Don't get me started with humanities professors who seem to think that their courses are the only ones capable to teaching students critical thinking.

Who says that, for instance?

It seems to me that every article that makes a case for the humanities does something to that effect.

[kaysixteen]

Obviously as a humanist, and a trained librarian as well, I have my biases, and I really do think the approach to critical thinking skills taught in some, though not all, humanities courses, is superior in general to that in STEM fields, and certainly a good bibliographic instruction course is very good at this as well, but I am willing to be disabused of this-- exactly how does a STEM course go about instructing critical thinking skills?

Now as to the question of whether an entering college kid who to date still lacks such skills cannot be taught them, why would you think that?

[Wahoo Redux]

To clarify, my bad experiences are not hostility towards the results of science, but more like hostility towards STEM academics - so not hostility in the sense that creationists or climate change deniers or antivaxers might be hostile to certain types of scientific knowledge, but more along the lines of thinking Sheldon Cooper would be one of the nicer and more personable scientists or, esp., thinking that scientific research doesn't involve creativity or imagination.

Don't get me started with humanities professors who seem to think that their courses are the only ones capable to teaching students critical thinking.

Who says that, for instance?

It seems to me that every article that makes a case for the humanities does something to that effect.

Yup, I figured you'd say something like that.  We've read the same articles.

Okay, I need to be more specific.

humanities professors who seem to think that their courses are the only ones capable to teaching students critical thinking.

No one says "the only ones."

The people on this forum are extremely intelligent, all of them.  We have no dummies here.  And so I am quite boggled when I read this sort of thing.

English faculty make the claim, which I would think is fairly rational, that reading and writing are good for critical thinking skills.  They are some of the oldest disciplines in education.  It seems to me that this argument is proven by neuroscientists.  None have claimed that humanities are the ONLY majors to do so.  That is a strawman.

Actually, that is an antagonistic strawman.  You, my friend, have simply joined the mob. 

Humanities professors make such silly claims because they have been backed into a corner and are trying very hard to justify their majors as "skills employers are looking for."  But we all know no corporation is looking to hire people because they have read Beowulf. 

I've come fully around to the idea that we need to let natural selection take its course, in no small part because even other academics (particularly in STEM or STEM-adjacent fields) seem to think that the humanities should go the way of the Dodo.  So be it.

I will simply remind the world that I grew up in the era in which math teachers justified their existence through the "you will use this every day for the rest of your life" hogwash. 

[Wahoo Redux]

Hey, go figure.

Herchinger Report: OPINION: Want to save the beleaguered English major? Abandon it.

And:

NYTimes Letter to the editor

Readers, please take note:

And, yes, an English major is excellent preparation for a future that requires adaptability, versatility, flexibility — competencies that employers seek.

Note that there is no claim to exclusivity here.  You may relax.



















]

[mleok]

Humanities professors make such silly claims because they have been backed into a corner and are trying very hard to justify their majors as "skills employers are looking for."  But we all know no corporation is looking to hire people because they have read Beowulf.

You seem to be admitting that there are humanities professors who do make the claim which I was alluding to. I have no issue with the assertion that the humanities can be an effective means of teaching critical thinking, I simply don't think it is exclusive to the humanities.

[marshwiggle]

Obviously as a humanist, and a trained librarian as well, I have my biases, and I really do think the approach to critical thinking skills taught in some, though not all, humanities courses, is superior in general to that in STEM fields, and certainly a good bibliographic instruction course is very good at this as well, but I am willing to be disabused of this-- exactly how does a STEM course go about instructing critical thinking skills?

Well, there's the whole thing about using evidence to support or *refute a hypothesis, rather than just accepting one's own preferred ideas about something. Given the number of humanities faculty that have abandoned this in favour of being "activists", I'd say STEM is more consistent about this.


*No matter how much you like an idea or interpretation, if it doesn't fit the facts, you have to abandon it.

[Wahoo Redux]

You seem to be admitting that there are humanities professors who do make the claim which I was alluding to.

You are now making wishful assertions.

Nope.  Alluded to the opposite.  Your critical thinking skills are faltering and you don't want to give up your little nasty pony.

Humanities I simply don't think it is exclusive to the humanities.

Um...yeah.  No one ever said it was. 

That was the point.