Consider Eliminating the Humanities

To stop teaching literature and the other arts on the grounds that they're bad for us would be like refusing to study diseases because they're bad for us. However, maybe there should be a moratorium on requiring those who don't really want to, to take courses in the "humanities." We first have to figure out where we are. Then if we decide that every college student should be exposed to the "humanities," let us also insist that every one of them be exposed to the sciences, social sciences, and technologies as well. It is a scandal that today in most colleges a person can't get through without a dose of art but can go all the way to a doctorate, as I did. without once having been exposed to such heterodox disciplines as chemistry, physics, economics, accounting, journalism, engineering, and anatomy C. R Snow's The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution angered many of us in the "humanities" by pointing to our militant ignorance of science. We knew he was right, but our stubborn pride kept us from doing anything about it. I think our attitude derived from our overexposure to the arts.

Notes:

Why must all college students study the humanities, but are given a free pass for the sciences?

Folksonomies: education two cultures humanities sciences

Taxonomies:
/hobbies and interests/games/board games and puzzles (0.407040)
/health and fitness (0.404851)
/art and entertainment (0.383561)

Keywords:
humanities (0.993629 (negative:-0.473516)), free pass (0.812261 (neutral:0.000000)), stubborn pride (0.784573 (positive:0.242395)), militant ignorance (0.783102 (negative:-0.588434)), heterodox disciplines (0.782992 (negative:-0.341587)), college students (0.776824 (negative:-0.473516)), teaching literature (0.766313 (negative:-0.957883)), anatomy C. (0.715803 (negative:-0.266248)), college student (0.713144 (negative:-0.217710)), Scientific Revolution (0.708633 (negative:-0.266248)), social sciences (0.701937 (neutral:0.000000)), arts (0.459398 (negative:-0.820215)), moratorium (0.450677 (negative:-0.516410)), doctorate (0.407949 (neutral:0.000000)), scandal (0.405619 (negative:-0.586384)), dose (0.403910 (negative:-0.586384)), grounds (0.398022 (negative:-0.957883)), attitude (0.393874 (negative:-0.682546)), journalism (0.391359 (negative:-0.217856)), colleges (0.383596 (negative:-0.586384)), courses (0.383229 (neutral:0.000000)), diseases (0.382707 (negative:-0.957883)), Cultures (0.379908 (negative:-0.266248)), person (0.377546 (negative:-0.586384)), technologies (0.376656 (positive:0.373560)), overexposure (0.375692 (negative:-0.682546)), Snow (0.375531 (negative:-0.266248)), art (0.374831 (negative:-0.586384)), way (0.374619 (neutral:0.000000)), chemistry (0.373980 (negative:-0.341587))

Why literature is bad for you

Books, Brochures, and Chapters>Book: Thorpe, Peter (1980), Why literature is bad for you, Burnham, Retrieved on 2014-09-01

Source Material [books.google.com]

Folksonomies: literary criticism