Why do we need the humanities?

Charles Steger, Virginia Polytechnic Institute

The world is beset with complex and often intractable problems where unfortunately sub-optimization is often the best possible outcome.

Problem solving and the effective application of these solutions require that multiple dimensions of the human intellect be employed. These range from deductive reasoning to the exercise of substantive aesthetic judgment.

Consider, for example, the design of a public housing project.

For the design of the building itself, the square footage per family, structural design and fire code requirements are all known and quantifiable. Logical deductive reasoning is the perfect tool.

However, there are psychological, sociological, economic, and environmental dimensions with hundreds of variables. Many of these cannot be quantified and yet they need to be integrated into the solution if the project is to be successful. This is where the aesthetic judgment and informed intuition must complement deductive reasoning. The former, in turn, draw upon the ability to recognize complex patterns of association and key structuring variables which often change from problem to problem.

How are these additional capacities for reasoning developed? Through experience. Experiential learning exercises and experience, not lectures, strengthen the capacity to recognize complex patterns with many variables of high uncertainty. They inform the intuition.

The failure to incorporate studies in the liberal arts and humanities, along with STEM education, will deprive the next generation of students the critical thinking skills and context necessary to address the challenges they will face in the future.

Kevin Reilly, University of Wisconsin

George Bernard Shaw opined that all professions are a conspiracy against the laity.

Humanities faculty have too often conspired well. Insider jargon – like hermeneutics – is rife. Talking about “the epistemology of post-structuralist overdetermination” does not do much to excite most undergraduates about literature.

Ironically, this “insider trading” has occurred at the same time that the Western canon is being stretched to connect to contemporary popular culture in such domains as film, television, music, and the new social media. The next course title could be “James Joyce and Irish Cinematic Zombiism”.

The apparent lack – in so many cases – of connective tissue joining the three elements of the curriculum—the major, general education, and electives—has further stoked anxiety that there is no common understanding of what an educated, 21st century American should know and be able to do.

But we do know. Employers send a consistent message about what they look for in a college-educated employee: the ability to write clearly, speak persuasively, analyze data effectively, work in diverse groups, and understand the competitive global knowledge environment.

These characteristics are all nurtured and tested in a purposeful liberal arts education. Employers want these capacities in their hires. And, critically, American democracy needs them in its citizens. Because of the overwhelming jumble of information and misinformation that surrounds us, a citizen without the kind of rangy mind the liberal arts cultivate is likely to have her citizenship hijacked.

There is, without doubt, a critical need to rethink and restructure the liberal arts core to help develop intellectually lively and engaged citizens and leaders. The good news is that this also constitutes an opportunity that society is looking to colleges and universities to seize.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Tags: Education