I want to take this occasion to address one of the most prominent criticisms of the humanities today. I am not referring to criticism of more recent vintage, which takes to task the humanities for a supposed excess of political correctness; this complaint we can set aside as the ideologically motivated lament that it surely is. Rather, I’m speaking of the more long-standing critique that takes the humanities to task for its inconsequence, its uselessness. The presumption that underwrites this critique is simple: its claim is that we do not learn anything by attending to the objects of humanities research. These objects – a poem, a film or play, a piece of music, or what have you – do not furnish our minds with information we can use. No special knowledge is required to enjoy these objects, and no useable knowledge is furnished through their study.
For the canonical version of this critique, we have to go back to the ancient Greeks. In one of Plato’s great dialogues, the philosopher Socrates enters into a debate with Ion, a rhapsodist or reciter of poetry, and a great admirer of Homer in particular. At stake in the debate between these two is what the poet (and by extension the rhapsodist) knows, what knowledge they draw on for their art. As Socrates compels Ion to acknowledge, the poet does not know much of any thing at all: early on, he tells Ion, “not from art and knowledge comes your power to speak concerning Homer” (532c). If Ion’s rhapsodizing were an art, Socrates reasons, Ion would be able to speak just as passionately and eloquently on all poets. But Ion can speak authoritatively only about Homer. (“Art” might be understood here as synonymous with “craft,” or a practice with a clearly established set of rules...
... middle of paper ...
...wn right. Art asks that we make a temporary home in ideas or experiences for which there can be no easy explanations.
I want to suggest that the very ground on which Plato and many since have dismissed the humanities is in another view the basis for the enduring and vital importance of the humanities today. It is worth remembering that problem solving – the activity prized above all others at an institution such as MIT – is made possible only through the prior activity of problem making. Problem making begins with the recognition that there are questions that have yet to be asked, latent possibilities that remain unexplored. And this, ultimately, is where the humanities may have most to offer us. What may seem like the mere multiplication of “uncertainties” and “doubts” might equally serve as a conduit to new thoughts, fresh insights, and creative solutions.
As I said before, math and science are important, but the humanities are just as important, if not more. “The humanities, done right, are the crucible within which our evolving notions of what it means to be fully human are put to the test; they teach us, incrementally, endlessly, not what to do but how to be” (Slouka). This quote taken from “Dehumanized” defines and truly puts Slouka’s beliefs into the perspective of what the humanities should teach students and how they should be taught, which I agree with fully. I believe that without the humanities, we, as humans, would all be the same and there would be no room to be different from one another. Whether it be by our culture, religion, or interests, not two people are alike. Individuals should not be bred into being something that they do not want to be or even like Slouka argues, students should not be a “capital investment” for the future of the economy. Students should be investing in themselves to express who they truly are, rather than being something that the economy expects them to
Hey, Computer Sciences Stop Hating on The Humanities is a magazine article written by Emma Pierson (2017) for employers seeking programmers and universities with computer science programs in which, Pierson addresses the consequences of ignoring the teachings of the humanities in universities. However, with the emphasis Pierson (2017) places on her ‘‘worrisome” thoughts and “difficult dilemma” she has on “algorithms” in paragraphs three and four and in conjunction with McLuhan’s (2009) philosophy of facing the anxiety that comes with critically analyzing flawed “algorithms” that “Narcosis narcotic” hides (para.16), the issue that Pierson targets is really the dependence that systems place on blind and arrogant programmers of flawed “algorithms” that cause “social disparities” (para. 4). These “social disparities” (para. 4) arise because of the programmer’s lack of education and respect or the humanities in moral decision making that universities can teach.
Art has been around for as long as humanity has existed, and it is much more than just drawings or paintings. Art is what every a person makes of it. Art can be drawings, paintings, writings, or even dancing, but never is it contained to just one of those things. As we explore just two aspect of art it is important to realize that there is no right or wrong way to look at the art. Art comes in many different forms, in which they are all interpreted a little differently by different people. For me, when I read a poem I do not instantly know what the poet is trying to say and I don’t find it as interesting, but when I look at a painting so many more thoughts comes and I can’t help by imagine what that artist was thinking while he was painting.
1) An Introduction to Humanities, Resource Book 3. The Open University 1998 5th ed; The Bath Press, 2001
In the article “Reading and Thought” the author Dwight MacDonald provides criticism and disagreement with Henry Luce’s idea of “functional curiosity”. Luce developed the term “functional curiosity” defining it as an eagerness of people to know the latest news happening around the world. On the other hand, MacDonald concludes that functional curiosity only strengthens reader’s practice in reading rather than in providing invaluable information. He underlines that literature nowadays is deficient and insubstantial since there is no deep meaning in the texts. Modern printed literature is simply being skimmed through by the reader as the reader nowadays tends to avoid too much information resisting thinking in such a way. Because of the new nature of the printed materials, MacDonald considers today’s reading behavior and the way people think as flimsy and indifferent. I agree that our thought has definitively changed since we are paying less time to serious critical thinking losing connections with society and awareness of it.
In conclusion, Mark Shiffman wrongly holds fear responsible for the decrease in students studying the humanities. Students today pursue more practical fields of study because the interests of human beings are ever-changing, prioritizing one’s passions is more difficult than determining their objective strengths, and one should focus on their various callings in society rather than striving solely
humanities ever advancing knowledge of our world, it can save lives, make us healthier and is
Going into this Humanities class, I had no idea what I was getting into. I didn’t know what the Humanities were and how it would impact my education at all. I had taken a number of history classes in high school and in college before and expected the Humanities to flow with my history classes in a sense. In my previous history class’s topics such as wars, The Great Depression, assassinations, the settling of different parts of the world, slavery, witch-hunts, and the use of animals were discussed. I thought that the Humanities would fall somewhere on the line with history. I wasn’t wrong with this assumption, but I wasn’t right either. The Humanities, I have learned, is so much more than the history that surrounds what people did, acted like, made as art, ate, and learned. The Humanities made all the different interactions between people clear. People to people, people to land, people to art, people to animals, and many other interactions that people come across. This class opened my mind to everything that art is and can be and to how important is it to learn from the past, grow for...
Humanities is described as the study of how people as a whole, process and record human life. From the wall paintings of the Stone Age, to Plato’s “The Republic”, to the exhilarating tranquility of the sound of jazz, humans have used philosophy, literature, storytelling, and art to express ourselves. The term “the humanities” is a term that molds its definition with the movement of time and the progression or regression of humans. The 18th century brought unprecedented change throughout the world. The colonies declared independence while creating arguably, some of the world’s greatest literary documents, the Declaration of Independence and
“Don’t do that. You’ll never get a job.” Such was the response of one of my favorite teachers to the interest that I had voiced in history as a potential field of study. A teacher whose class a friend and I had enjoyed so much we had taken time out of a weekday afternoon to come visit her. Sure, my response contrasted pretty acutely with that of my friend who wanted to pursue a career in computational linguistics, but history is my genuine interest. In an environment that constantly peddles science and technology careers, it’s hard to love history and literature.
Socrates demonstrates to Ion that rhapsodes have no knowledge. Socrates tells Ion that if his ability came by mastery, he would be able to speak about all the other poets as well. The whole of any other subject won’t have same discipline throughout and this goes for every subject that can be mastered. It’s a divine power that moves Ion, as a “Magnetic” stone moves iron rings. This stone not only pulls those rings, if they’re iron, it also puts power in the rings, so that they in turn can do just what the stone does, pull other rings, so that there’s sometimes a very long chain of iron pieces and rings hanging from one another. And the power in all of them depends on this stone. None of the epic poets, if they’re good, are masters of their subject; they are inspired, possessed, and that is how thy utter all those beautiful poems.
“SCIENCE HAS BOMBS, and humanities have Britney Spears” (Kershner as cited in Purvis, 2004). This amusing comment, made during a professorial debate concerning which discipline was superior, epitomises the divide that exists between the humanities and sciences. Although the debate has its roots in the Industrial Revolution, in more recent times it was signalled by Snow’s (1959; 1964) discussion outlining the dysfunctional gulf that exists between the cultures. Essentially Snow was critical of the breakdown of communication and understanding between the worlds of the humanities and sciences and blamed this for many of society’s unresolved problems. He was particularly critical of the literary intellectuals: “This loss is leading us to interpret the past wrongly, to misjudge the present, and to deny our hopes of the future. It is making it difficult or impossible for us to take good action.” (Snow, 1964, p.60) In the years that followed there has been considerable discussion and debate about the issue and consequent discussions about the value of the sciences and humanities for society’s wellbeing. For example, Leavis (Leavis & Yudkin, 1963) criticised the notion of a chasm and, in a vitriolic manner, suggested that Snow was simply a public relations ‘stooge’ for the sciences. The argument was deepened by a pseudoscientific hoax paper published in a post-modern cultural studies journal by Sokal (1996a, 1996b), a mathematical physicist, who demonstrated that there was an acceptance of a lack of rigour in published humanities work. There was a furore over this hoax and counter arguments and rebuttals engaged many academics in a bitter dispute, but unsurprisingly an examination of this literature reveals that the protagonists talked ...
Making Arguments about Literature: A Compact Guide And Anthology. Ed. John Schilb and John Clifford. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins,. 346-347.
The mind creates the emotions and ideals responsible for art. The brain is capable of imagining glorious things, and art is the physical manifestation of these ideals. These ideals are usually intense emotions with aesthetic power (Wilson, 220). Art organizes these emotions in a matter that can easily express the ideals to...
All throughout time people have used their imaginative minds to express some form of art, whether it be painting, drawing, sculpture, and dance, theatre, music or technology, this has happened all around the world. Furthermore, I think that the youth of the world have the biggest imagination because everything to them is new and they can’t help but imagine “what if” or “how”. Therefor that’s the power of imagination, and preferably for me I use it for art. Art to me is almost like an escape from everything negative in my life. Many say that art is beauty, and we say beauty ...