How Science Can Progress the Humanities

Diagnoses of the malaise of the humanities rightly point to anti-intellectual trends in our culture and to the commercialization of our universities. But an honest appraisal would have to acknowledge that some of the damage is self-inflicted. The humanities have yet to recover from the disaster of postmodernism, with its defiant obscurantism, dogmatic relativism, and suffocating political correctness. And they have failed to define a progressive agenda. Several university presidents and provosts have lamented to me that when a scientist comes into their office, it’s to announce some exciting new research opportunity and demand the resources to pursue it. When a humanities scholar drops by, it’s to plead for respect for the way things have always been done.

Those ways do deserve respect, and there can be no replacement for the varieties of close reading, thick description, and deep immersion that erudite scholars can apply to individual works. But must these be the only paths to understanding? A consilience with science offers the humanities countless possibilities for innovation in understanding. Art, culture, and society are products of human brains. They originate in our faculties of perception, thought, and emotion, and they cumulate and spread through the epidemiological dynamics by which one person affects others. Shouldn’t we be curious to understand these connections? Both sides would win. The humanities would enjoy more of the explanatory depth of the sciences, to say nothing of the kind of a progressive agenda that appeals to deans and donors. The sciences could challenge their theories with the natural experiments and ecologically valid phenomena that have been so richly characterized by humanists.

In some disciplines, this consilience is a fait accompli. Archeology has grown from a branch of art history to a high-tech science. Linguistics and the philosophy of mind shade into cognitive science and neuroscience.

Similar opportunities are there for the exploring. The visual arts could avail themselves of the explosion of knowledge in vision science, including the perception of color, shape, texture, and lighting, and the evolutionary aesthetics of faces and landscapes. Music scholars have much to discuss with the scientists who study the perception of speech and the brain’s analysis of the auditory world.

As for literary scholarship, where to begin? John Dryden wrote that a work of fiction is “a just and lively image of human nature, representing its passions and humours, and the changes of fortune to which it is subject, for the delight and instruction of mankind.” Linguistics can illuminate the resources of grammar and discourse that allow authors to manipulate a reader’s imaginary experience. Cognitive psychology can provide insight about readers’ ability to reconcile their own consciousness with those of the author and characters. Behavioral genetics can update folk theories of parental influence with discoveries about the effects of genes, peers, and chance, which have profound implications for the interpretation of biography and memoir—an endeavor that also has much to learn from the cognitive psychology of memory and the social psychology of self-presentation. Evolutionary psychologists can distinguish the obsessions that are universal from those that are exaggerated by a particular culture and can lay out the inherent conflicts and confluences of interest within families, couples, friendships, and rivalries that are the drivers of plot.

And as with politics, the advent of data science applied to books, periodicals, correspondence, and musical scores holds the promise for an expansive new “digital humanities.” The possibilities for theory and discovery are limited only by the imagination and include the origin and spread of ideas, networks of intellectual and artistic influence, the persistence of historical memory, the waxing and waning of themes in literature, and patterns of unofficial censorship and taboo.


Science has many tools for looking deeper into texts and providing new perspectives and insights.

Folksonomies: science two cultures humanities digital humanities

/science (0.600085)
/law, govt and politics/government (0.473114)
/society (0.370261)

humanities countless possibilities (0.907147 (positive:0.757951)), progressive agenda (0.865957 (negative:-0.256151)), new research opportunity (0.851189 (positive:0.594702)), Humanities Science (0.836312 (positive:0.835165)), ecologically valid phenomena (0.827049 (positive:0.692667)), cognitive psychology (0.808076 (positive:0.385643)), humanities scholar (0.786085 (neutral:0.000000)), cognitive science (0.751452 (neutral:0.000000)), dogmatic relativism (0.748387 (negative:-0.617053)), fait accompli (0.746037 (negative:-0.320055)), new perspectives (0.745053 (positive:0.835165)), high-tech science (0.743660 (positive:0.212372)), vision science (0.743270 (neutral:0.000000)), honest appraisal (0.741618 (negative:-0.214740)), data science (0.740811 (neutral:0.000000)), defiant obscurantism (0.739905 (negative:-0.457107)), political correctness (0.739507 (negative:-0.741128)), anti-intellectual trends (0.737644 (negative:-0.759654)), university presidents (0.732090 (neutral:0.000000)), individual works (0.731943 (positive:0.527980)), deep immersion (0.731514 (positive:0.527980)), human brains (0.730206 (positive:0.356406)), Similar opportunities (0.726670 (positive:0.291457)), social psychology (0.725681 (neutral:0.000000)), close reading (0.725513 (neutral:0.000000)), epidemiological dynamics (0.724783 (negative:-0.316986)), particular culture (0.724751 (negative:-0.560983)), art history (0.724503 (positive:0.212372)), memoir—an endeavor (0.723875 (neutral:0.000000)), visual arts (0.722064 (neutral:0.000000))

scientist:JobTitle (0.723757 (neutral:0.000000)), high-tech science:FieldTerminology (0.639987 (positive:0.212372)), John Dryden:Person (0.516377 (positive:0.389635))

Psychology (0.971544): dbpedia | freebase | opencyc
Linguistics (0.563940): dbpedia | freebase | opencyc
Mind (0.515455): dbpedia | freebase | opencyc
Philosophy (0.462547): dbpedia | freebase | opencyc
Cognitive psychology (0.454355): dbpedia | freebase | opencyc
Cognition (0.452557): dbpedia | freebase | opencyc
Humanities (0.450326): dbpedia | freebase
Social sciences (0.444930): dbpedia | opencyc

 Science Is Not Your Enemy An impassioned plea to neglected novelists, embattled professors, and tenure-less historians
Electronic/World Wide Web>Internet Article:  Pinker, Steven (August 6, 2013), Science Is Not Your Enemy An impassioned plea to neglected novelists, embattled professors, and tenure-less historians, New Republic, Retrieved on 2013-12-10
  • Source Material []
  • Folksonomies: science culture two cultures humanities


    10 DEC 2013

     Can Science and the Humanities Inform One Another

    How Science Can Progress the Humanities > Contrast > The Humanities are About "Inwardness"
    Two opposing viewpoints.
    Folksonomies: two cultures
    Folksonomies: two cultures