In this day and age, much of our focus as students and as citizens are on technological and scientific advances. It appears that the future will be largely defined by the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
The article discusses how, throughout the world, research in humanities and the number of students studying humanities are facing a general decline. It notes that, at the college and university level, research funding for humanities is rather low when compared to research funding for other fields. This cut in funding for humanities may be due to the prevalent mindset that STEM fields will allow for greater, and more efficient, breakthroughs for generations to come.
Do you think that there is still value in studying/researching humanities today? What do you think might become of our society is people continue to be so antagonistic towards humanities?
Also, seeing that most of us are applying to colleges and deciding what to study now, how many of you are planning to major in some type of humanities? Why will you, or why won’t you, choose to study liberal arts?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/02/us/humanities-studies-under-strain-around-the-globe.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&src=rechp
8 comments:
I believe that there is still some value in Humanities research because we are indeed, human. Despite this need to research humanities, there is a now large plethora of information online and at the hand of many individuals, so much "research" is being done on social-media sites like Reddit and Tumblr.
Like the article said, there has always been some crticism on the field of humanities, and despite the lack of significant decline, there is absolutely no gain in the field. Our fascination and need for STEM research has definitely fueled this somewhat decline, and I believe that in perspective, STEM research may be a little more important. As we face an impending fuel crisis as well as environmental crisis, STEM research may be where the money needs to be. When you look back at history where humanities was in full swing, it was in a time of economic prosperity, and "golden ages." Hopefully we will stabilize our world long enough to permit one.
I myself will not be going into liberal arts and have no interest to do so. I have always been interested in science, more focused in human biologies, and I am much more keen on studying whats going inside humans, rather than what they are doing.
Overall, I hope humanities gets the funding it needs, but I believe, as of now, STEM research may be a bit more important.
One reason for STEM funding outstripping humanities research may have to do with the effects of technology on humanities research. With more sophisticated computers and data servers become smaller and cheaper, and increasingly rigorous documentation methods that expedite access to information, humanities research has become in a sense cheaper than ever, both in monetary terms and manpower terms. In contrast, as technology itself becomes more sophisticated, the amount of money and effort required to discover the next new set of more complex phenomena only increases at an exponential rate. This isn't to say that humanities research will decrease - just that a bigger proportion of money and manpower will go towards STEM research as opposed to fields in humanities. As Alex said, STEM research is being looked to as the future, solving our environmental and energy problems - its seen as a more practical approach to solving systemic world problems than studying languages and ancient texts. The field of humanities will probably decrease in prestige, but not in its comprehensiveness.
To add onto what Alex and Kevin said, I think that the decrease in research funding for humanities stems from the impression that a STEM education is more practical; additionally, comparisons of the U.S. and other countries' developments and academic performances in math and science seem to fuel the increased emphasis on STEM education in the U.S. at the expense of humanities. This reminds me a bit of how the U.S. sought to emphasize math and science more in schools due to fears that the U.S. was falling behind the Soviet Union in the space race. However, I do feel that research in the humanities is still useful in understanding ourselves as humans (as Alex said), culture, and society, among others. (Also, even those who focus in the STEM fields need a solid grasp of language in order to convey their ideas clearly.)
As of now, I'm not planning on majoring in a humanities field, but that's not to say I find humanities not valuable. At the same time, though, I can't say I wasn't influenced by the thought that a major in the humanities is less "practical" than one in the STEM fields.
I agree with the above, that STEM research is more practical, but humanities is a valuable part of society. If the whole world is driven by mathematics and science in the future, we would lose the value of culture that differentiates each country from another. It's important to improve technology to drive society, but then again, we wouldn't want to be a world full of numbers and lab reports. Culture is definitely important. I think we should always have a balance of STEM and humanities. It would be a terrible mistake to compensate humanities for greater STEM studies. As Elkana said, all the STEM research is useless if you can't communicate it. There's no good in throwing out humanities for practicality. Humanities are always important.
I think that the main reason why more and more people are going into STEM fields is because there are more opportunities for higher salaries and more jobs available. I mean who wouldn't want a high paying job with a lot of opportunities? However, similar to Elkana and Rick, I think that our society cannot advance without humanities because the two areas are needed in pretty much any kind of study, lab, etc. I think that as an individual it is especially important to have a strong understanding of both areas of study because it is important to be well-rounded, even in education. In my opinion, I think a successful person will be able to look at a situation or study from all angles. I do disagree, however, with the idea that STEM is more practical. I know the word "practical" is kind of vague, so I may be misinterpreting, but I think any education is valuable, whether it be a degree in English or Engineering.
Although the focus on STEM would be very practical since this generation now overrun by technology, I agree with the above; there is value to every education. Having a diverse group of academic interests will allow for creative, new ideas. I believe that a liberal arts education is equally important because it provides students with crucial skills such as reasoning, communication, writing skills.
Well, from a research standpoint I completely understand why STEM fields receive more funding. Those areas require more technology and resources than the humanities do. I think another reason the research for STEM fields is more important would be that there can always be advances made to science and technology whereas the same thing cant always be said for humanities fields. The need for scientific advancements is so high that in turn, the humanities get put on the back burner, which I dont necessarily disagree with.
Like Cristina, I think that the humanities are good and helpful, but increasing funding to them can rarely be justified the way increasing STEM funding can. How will more money help philosophy? Language? Art history? Increased funding will have negligible effects, unlike increasing STEM funding, where students and professors can quickly being producing new research and data.
It is good to support the humanities, but it is necessary and more practical to boost STEM.
Post a Comment