Slashdot Mirror


Why Engineering Freshmen Should Take Humanities Courses

Lasrick sends in an article from John Horgan at Scientific American explaining why he thinks engineering freshmen should make a bit of space in their course-load for the humanities. Quoting: "But it is precisely because science is so powerful that we need the humanities now more than ever. In your science, mathematics and engineering classes, you're given facts, answers, knowledge, truth. Your professors say, 'This is how things are.' They give you certainty. The humanities, at least the way I teach them, give you uncertainty, doubt and skepticism. The humanities are subversive. They undermine the claims of all authorities, whether political, religious or scientific. This skepticism is especially important when it comes to claims about humanity, about what we are, where we came from, and even what we can be and should be. Science has replaced religion as our main source of answers to these questions. Science has told us a lot about ourselves, and we’re learning more every day. But the humanities remind us that we have an enormous capacity for deluding ourselves."

16 of 564 comments (clear)

  1. Oh, gag me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The humanities are subversive. They undermine the claims of all authorities,

    BULLSHIT.

    The "humanities" in modern American academia are so fucking orthodox they might as well be called the "government worship department."

    1. Re:Oh, gag me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      but they do introduce Engineers mainly male engineers to to girls something that normally dosnt happen much briefly.

    2. Re:Oh, gag me. by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "We live in a world increasingly dominated by science. "

      That's like saying "We live in a world increasingly dominated by reality".
      If science doesn't match reality, than it's not science (or atleast the specific scientific theory is broken).
      Humanities is religion for people who don't believe in a deity.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    3. Re:Oh, gag me. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am ok with engineers taking humanity. However humanity majors needs to take some real math and science.

      No one should graduate a 4 year college without at least 2 semesters of calculious and one 200 level or above elective in math and 2 lab science. And colleges shouldn't water them down for humanity majors. They fail they take the class over again.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:Oh, gag me. by BrokenHalo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think majors in the humanities should take some engineering courses... like some basic math, and formal logic.

      The most clued-up logicians I have ever met are graduates in philosophy. Logic is a seriously hard course of study, and I haven't met many engineers who are up to the challenge. (It's just a pity that philosophers are doomed to unemployment.)

      On the other hand, I don't know if the universities I have attended are typical, but I have noticed an extreme level of erudition with regard to humanities in a majority of the most brilliant mathematics professors I have known. It seems to come with the territory, for some reason. I have not noticed any such broad-mindedness among engineers.

    5. Re:Oh, gag me. by buddyglass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Puh-lease. And I say this as someone with a Maths degree: the vast, vast majority of college graduates would derive zero benefit from two semesters of calculus, even if they passed with top marks. If anything, I'd rather them take a probability and statistics class. Discrete math. Something with a proof or two. But calculus? No thanks.

    6. Re:Oh, gag me. by _anomaly_ · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I agree with some of what you say, but after reading a bunch of posts where people are trying to use anecdotal evidence as proof that something is as such everywhere, I had to comment at some point.

      I agree engineering students should get some basic classes on economy and maybe one on communication so they stop making awful presentations.

      Agree.

      But psychology, sociology, etc., hell no!

      Disagree. There's no harm in this, and in my experience (like what everyone else's comment is based on, but no one is disclaiming) you can only benefit. Yes I slept through most of my Psychology lectures and still got an A, but there were interesting bits that made me think from time to time. There were humanities classes that made me read books that I would have never picked up, and I'm grateful for it. I still refer back to things I learned in Music History from time to time.
      It is my belief that engineering students should take a healthy dose of humanities classes, not as many as possible as the article implies and not none at all as most comments here scream outright. The more well-rounded we ALL are, engineers and humanitarians (if that's the right word here) alike, the better off we all are.

      I have yet to meet a research psychologist that actually uses statistics correctly.

      Never mind the anecdotal evidence, but it's not proof of anything, especially when I would lay a healthy bet on saying most "engineers" (or those purporting to be an engineer) haven't done an integral since school, and a lot probably don't recall for what they are even used.

      And political science and philosophy majors tend to lose flat-out in debates against engineering students, simply because the latter knows how to analyse the situation correctly.

      Disagree. But then again, your evidence is as anecdotal as mine. I agree that engineering students typically know how to analyze a problem or situation better, but the Philosophy courses that I took taught me a lot about how you should form logical arguments, critical in these debates about which you speak. On the other hand, the Logic classes at the engineering school taught me the subject from a different perspective, where I learned more about how to combine logical statements to get the desired outcome. Both related, and neither more significant than the other in my eyes.

      Engineering is more about analysing problems, seeing the possible solutions for said problems and then implementing them.

      Agree.

      Arguing and being sceptic is based on the same premises.

      Somewhat agree, but a subject such as philosophy is heavily based on forming arguments and being skeptical.

      So in fact it should be the other way around.

      Agree, in a way. It should go both ways.

      TL;DR;
      This war on humanities is mostly derived from a preconceived notion that "they're stupid and we're smart" that a lot of students in the sciences have towards those in the humanities. If a lot of us would get off our pedestal for a second, and open our minds to more than what's outside the realm of science, we may just learn something.
      It doesn't mean we have to denounce what we've learned in our science and engineering courses.

      I was a Computer Engineering and Computer Science major and got a M.Eng.

      --
      "I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein
  2. Better idea: by TheEyes · · Score: 5, Informative

    Scientists should take courses on Rational Thinking. That's basically what you're after here, and it has the advantage of specifically targetting the problems you are trying to address, rather than taking the shotgun approach and trying to get every STEM student to become a Renaissance Man.

    1. Re:Better idea: by mjwx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In your science, mathematics and engineering classes, you're given facts, answers, knowledge, truth. Your professors say, 'This is how things are.' They give you certainty.

      Humanist misunderstands what Science and the Scientific method are, tells us we need to be taught to question things, when the entire basis of the field is questioning things, and never believing anything to be fact, knowledge or truth.

      So what you're saying is that 1st year Humanists need to take an engineering course?

      I'd definitely agree with that.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  3. Should take law by anarcobra · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Engineering students should take courses in law so they can have some idea how to avoid legal problems.
    Also, it could give us some lawyers who actually know what they are talking about.

    1. Re:Should take law by SerpentMage · · Score: 5, Informative

      We do in Canada. Granted the course was a simple introduction, but it sure helped me understand the legal system and its underpinnings.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    2. Re:Should take law by Vintermann · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Law students should take courses in statistics, statistical modelling, and applied statistics in the social sciences. So that they avoid elementary mistakes like the prosecutor's fallacy, and so they could systematically identify biases in their own profession.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  4. I would have thought it more important by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would have thought it more important that humanities students take a basic science and engineering course, so they at least have some understanding of how things work, scientific method, and what a theory is. I think the idea that scepticism comes from humanities rather than science is a joke, and shows a complete misunderstanding of falsifiability and Karl Popper's work on the philosophy of science.

  5. and the other way around by stenvar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Engineering students should take humanities courses, and they often do. But humanities students should also take science and engineering courses. It's called a liberal arts education, and it should be mandatory. No English major, anthropologist, or historian should get a degree without demonstrating a reasonable understanding of statistics, calculus, physics, chemistry, and computer science.

    Unfortunately, most people educated in the humanities are thoroughly ignorant of science, engineering, and mathematics. As a consequences, they are completely baffled by how the modern world works and then proceed to produce utter garbage in their own fields as a result.

  6. Wait what by Azure+Flash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "In your science, mathematics and engineering classes, you're given facts, answers, knowledge, truth. Your professors say, 'This is how things are.'"

    That's a funny way to hear "those are only approximations", "there's always going to be some margin of error" or "we're not 100% sure how this behaves".

  7. Scientists and engineers are innately skeptical by physicsphairy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my experience, scientists and engineers come ladled with doubts on human authority. In fact, it is often something that derives their dislike of the humanities—they trust numbers and figures, but when it comes to interpreting poems or arguing politics, their skepticism leads them to wish little to do with it. (and if it's not skepticism then it's their relative lack of skill)

    I go to an engineering school which has almost no arts program. (Some english, history, and philosophy -- just what we need for general accreditation.) Although I myself am pretty keen on literature and many of the humanities, I hear all the gripes from the engineers. And I can tell you exactly what is wrong with this "scientists need humanities to understand such and such" approach. Scientists and engineers understand exactly what they need to achieve what they want, and thoroughly resent being shoe-horned into somebody else's idea of a well-rounded graduate when it has absolutely nothing to do with their personal interest or goals.

    If you want the STEM crowd to embrace the humanities, stop trying to justify why they should join your program and come up with a new program especially for them. Let their literature be Isaac Asimov and Frank Herbert. Teach them "Art in Fractional Dimension with Computer Generated Imagery." Give them a music class where they build instruments and synthesizers. Let them walk into the classroom and feel on the very first day like they have something to contribute.

    When science and math students walk into a humanities classroom and all their talent and ability in math and science is immediately considered moot, it's not them rejecting the humanities, it's the humanities rejecting them.