Liberal Arts Majors

[Fabala]

I think much of the problem with a Liberal Arts degree is that it isn't preset, isn't designed to specialize in any one area. On the positive side, this means a student who isn't sure of what they want to do has an option. On the negative side, that same student, without foresighted planning, can graduate and end up not "good enough" in any one area when looking to join the workforce.

What it boils down to is that it isn't the fault of the degree but the student should there be no linear design to their class choices. ;p

[Lola Granola]

Ollie: Actually, I do live in Seattle and attend the University of Washington Campus there!

Another note: All students entered the same university (or pertaining to where you specifically go), regardless of what majors they eventually chose. It means everyone was smart enough, qualified, and/or had potential to excel in higher education. Choosing a field in math or science is the most practical way to go, but the reality is some people just don't want to be doing that kind of work for the rest of their lives. I know I can get a degree in math or science, my confidence in my own intelligence isn't lacking. I just have no desire to pursue either.

And, to support the people who have said you can't have one without the other, to get a degree at my university there is a requirement to have a certain amount of credits in visual interdisciplinary arts AND math/natural science no matter what you major in. There is a reason for that.

[Aizmov]

First of all, I want to apologize to anyone I might of offended, never meant to offend anyone.

I still stand by the fact that if any nation wants to maintain its military and economic superiority it needs scientists and engineers. You can never conquer the world with liberal arts.
The USA as it is now, trails Europe and Asia in the number of scientists and engineers it graduates (over a dozen other countries graduate more scientists and engineers than we do), and we are becoming more and more dependent on technology from other countries. If we don't have the engineers and scientists that can give this country a strong state-of-the-art manufacturing base, our superiority will be long gone!

If you look at any nation that went through an economical breakthrough (Japan for example) it was done through science and engineering, through manufacturing, through high technology, not dancing or singing their way to prosperity.

That why I can never take Liberal Arts seriously.

Sorry if I offended anyone

[Wio]

False.

There are plenty of examples of bad art. Plenty of examples of gigantic pieces of crap that require no creativity other than ramming their naked, paint-plastered bodies onto a canvas and calling it "PAIN OF MY SOUL". (I can't think of any of that specific type except for from Art School Confidential.) And while it's true that it really comes down to personal preference, wasn't it you who said that if most people think of it a certain way, that certain way of thought is more valid?

When most people think a certain way, it does make it more valid in the context of whether something should be taught. For example, teaching about the Mona Lisa is more valid than any old portrait because more people acknowledged it.
I'm not talking about validity but truth here. A piece of art can't be truely more beautiful unless put before a certain perspective, where as you CAN find a perspective that would find it less beautiful.

The success of a piece of art completely depends completely on the perspective of it's audience. An artist can't control that, they can only create a piece of art and hope it holds water. Thus the impact is completely luck-based.

And a human most certainly can be ugly thanks to the beauty of science. One good example is how they found a basic way to break down a beautiful face. If it can fit a certain graph well enough, the face is both technically and obviously attractive. Those that deviate from it are less so. Those that don't fit it even remotely are either Quasimodos or... not human.
Granted, there's more to beauty than how well they fit a formula, but that delves more into what you find beautiful/arousing/etc. that I don't feel like speculating on because.

"Granted, there's more to beauty" alone makes my point.

and when you say "logical" you mean "boring" or just no emotions whatsoever? Art (and I don't mean just pretty pictures) is meant to reach a part that isn't purely logic. I'm not sure what kind of people can't ever be affected by it unless they have some sort of problem that needs to be checked out (i.e. a coma!).

I never said that they were indifferent to art. I said they don't like art most of the time, because there's no 'method' to good art. A formula WILL have an impact on society if it can solve a problem, period.
When I say "logical", I'm talking about people who want to know the logical methodology behind something. They can understand the importance of a discovery by what doors it opens and how often it is applied.

In any case that offers no explanation for elitism or general [butt]hattery involved in "logical" people's attitudes towards LA majors.

It was what it was.

[Lola Granola]

You can never conquer the world with liberal arts.

I don't think you could offend anyone. You're just so incredibly ignorant I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You still have this idea that liberal arts are purely visual and performing fields. Scientists and engineers do not create foreign policy nor are they directly involved in the politics of international relations.

[Aizmov]

I don't think you could offend anyone. You're just so incredibly ignorant I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You still have this idea that liberal arts are purely visual and performing fields. Scientists and engineers do not create foreign policy nor are they directly involved in the politics of international relations.

If anything this nation needs less politicians/lawyers and more engineers. I don't see how an engineer can't run a country if we ever were to run out of politicians

Who is going to be engineering, the bombs, tanks, planes and software that controls them? Not the Liberal Artists

This country is falling behind because of the lack of scientists and engineers (a dozen or so other countries graduate more scientists and engineers than we do), look at any triumph in history (Japan after WW2 or China now) it was done through manufacturing, not music and dancing

[Lola Granola]

I lol'd. That is all.

[Aizmov]

I lol'd. That is all.

I'm typing from the heart, I'm actually concerned about this country. We have too many people suing each other!

"While the United States has been busy creating lawyers, we have been busier creating engineers."
"...if you have so many lawyers, they have to find business, which sometimes they have to create. Sometimes nonsensical lawsuits are generated by lawyers. In this country (the United States) everybody sues everybody."
- Akio Morita (co-founder of Sony Corporation)

You know that some of the technologies that are supposed to get us off of oil are NIH! We sure use a lot of Japanese batteries

[Sagat]

You`re an idiot Aizmov. It was fun watching you digging your hole and having everyone systematically throw dirt on your argument, but enough is enough.

I don`t know where to even address what you say, aside from your seeming over comparisons with that magical wonderland called Japan.

All you do, all your argument, revolves around that scientists and engineers promote technological advancement. You seem to think that advancement in a few select fields somehow translates to advancement to society as a whole. You focus on a very narrow scope and are completely disregarding everything else.

If you cannot honestly see the impact that the arts, politics, history, dancing, culture, singing, music, everything under the broad scope of liberal arts or whatever its called, you are simply .. well, stupid.

Sounds like your perfect world would be one without philosophy, historical research, dancing, music, artwork, theatre, language study and political studies. Sounds like you want people to abandon everything that expresses the human soul and what it is to be human.

What a rich and beautiful world it would be ruled by such borderline technocrats such as yourself. And we would be goose stepping where and sieg heiling when?

I would tell you to stop while you're ahead .. but you aren't. Maybe cut your losses and just stop period?

[Masali]

Liberal Arts majors get more action.

Also, if we lose sight of that which is beautiful, in favor of that which is practical, life would be dull and loathsome.

[Aizmov]

You`re an idiot Aizmov. It was fun watching you digging your hole and having everyone systematically throw dirt on your argument, but enough is enough.

I don`t know where to even address what you say, aside from your seeming over comparisons with that magical wonderland called Japan.

All you do, all your argument, revolves around that scientists and engineers promote technological advancement. You seem to think that advancement in a few select fields somehow translates to advancement to society as a whole. You focus on a very narrow scope and are completely disregarding everything else.

If you cannot honestly see the impact that the arts, politics, history, dancing, culture, singing, music, everything under the broad scope of liberal arts or whatever its called, you are simply .. well, stupid.

Sounds like your perfect world would be one without philosophy, historical research, dancing, music, artwork, theatre, language study and political studies. Sounds like you want people to abandon everything that expresses the human soul and what it is to be human.

What a rich and beautiful world it would be ruled by such borderline technocrats such as yourself. And we would be goose stepping where and sieg heiling when?

I would tell you to stop while you're ahead .. but you aren't. Maybe cut your losses and just stop period?

We can disagree, I sure see reason in my argument but name calling please, no need to go down that road
All of the improvements in our life style, is all due to science and engineering, I see arts having nothing to do with it..
I took my share of Liberal Arts courses, they do nothing, I was only required to take them as electives
They can be hobbies, interests, maybe fun to some, but I'm sorry, I don't see much in them..
If my point of view is wrong, nothing prohibiting it from being so, then say so and provide an opposite argument, but name calling
I guess I'll stop now, I understand that no one is enjoying my posts, sorry for taking so much of your time and sorry for offending you and I apologize to all of you.

[Midnight Rambler]

I'd just like to point out that Azimov is not a bad guy by any means. Heck, if not for him I'd have almost no rep at all and yet we never agree on anything! He's simply stating what he believes to be true. And I can't speak for the rest of the world, but I can tell you that a great many people here in the great state of Alabama think exactly the same way. I would rather face his statements head-on and try to rebut them than shame him into silence. And, though he made some strong statements, I was egging him on with my "glorified mechanic" remark. At the time I didn't realize that so many other people were going to jump into the conversation.

That being said, I would just like to point out that Liberal Arts majors are far better equipped to identify and solve the problems of humanity than engineers. For example, the US and Iran are now at odds with one another. When the President and the Secretary of State sit down to discuss the matter, they're not going to be doing calculus or designing programs. They are going to look at the 1. history of Iran and of the US-Iranian relationship, 2. the culture and language of the Iranians, to know what bargaining positions will bear fruit and which will make the situation worse, 3. the language and interpretations of words and phrases in Arabic so that we don't accidentally mean one thing and say another or needlessly offend the Iranian diplomats, 4. philosophical differences in policy choices which serve to signal the rest of the world where the US stands on key issues such as human rights, 5. the psychology of the Iraqi diplomats and particulary the Iraqi leaders, etc. etc. etc.

The overwhelming majority of problems that humans face in this world, both as individuals and as groups, cannot be solved with 2+2=4 type thinking. They require abstract thinking from educated minds, not engineering solutions. All Liberal Arts studies are studies of the human condition, certainly the most relevant knowledge to humans living in a civilized world.

That's not to say Engineers don't have a place. Of course they do! Why do you think they make the big bucks? Engineers take dreams and make them into reality, they engineer and build the things that make our modern lifestyle possible. And Azimov is right about the US being critically short-handed when it comes to engineers and scientists. However, I also think it is possible to be an Engineer without spitting on those who work in other very important fields, mmmkay?...

[MetalKnight]

Actually, Aizmov does bring up a good point- and trying to address an important problem. Our standard of living and our efficiency in rescource management hinges on our scientific and engineering ability. Unfortunately, our country is losing ground in these fields with respect to the world. Why? Perhaps we’re not emphasizing these fields like we once had. Bill Gates once remarked,

"When I compare our high schools to what I see when I'm traveling abroad, I am terrified for our work force of tomorrow. In math and science, our fourth graders are among the top students in the world. By eighth grade, they're in the middle of the pack. By 12th grade, U.S. students are scoring near the bottom of all industrialized nations. . . . The percentage of a population with a college degree is important, but so are sheer numbers. In 2001, India graduated almost a million more students from college than the United States did. China graduates twice as many students with bachelor's degrees as the U.S., and they have six times as many graduates majoring in engineering. In the international competition to have the biggest and best supply of knowledge workers, America is falling behind."

But of course, to say liberal arts is obsolete is heavy handed. Science without humanity and knowledge without character are the vices of society. Technology is useless if we do not have the policy and laws to cope with it. Bombs and tanks are dangerous if you do not have the character to use them without restraint. A tool is only as good as the way it is used, and to create them for irresponsible people is much more detrimental to a society than not creating them at all.

That being said, Aizmov has a point when he says we need science and engineers to progress our society. If you ever had to read The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman (a very boring book- so I don’t recommend it) there’s a quote that he uses, “In China today, Bill Gates is Britney Spears. In America today, Britney Spears is Britney Spears -- and that is our problem." No, Friendman is not bashing liberal arts, but the fact our society places to much value and emphasis in “get rich and get famous with little effort and help in return." This lazy, lack of motivation, tendency to procrastinate, hope to be talented, take things day by day mentality is where our problem lies, not our attempts to expand culturally and civilly - and it is coming back to bite us.

[Midnight Rambler]

...That being said, Aizmov has a point when he says we need science and engineers to progress our society. If you ever had to read The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman (a very boring book- so I don’t recommend it) there’s a quote that he uses, “In China today, Bill Gates is Britney Spears. In America today, Britney Spears is Britney Spears -- and that is our problem." No, Friendman is not bashing liberal arts, but the fact our society places to much value and emphasis in “get rich and get famous with little effort and help in return." This lazy, lack of motivation, tendency to procrastinate, hope to be talented, take things day by day mentality is where our problem lies, not our attempts to expand culturally and civilly - and it is coming back to bite us.

Another important factor to consider is the role of Religious Fundamentalists here in the US. These people frown on some of the very basic concepts of biology, physics, archaeology, etc. and they are increasingly sending their children to religious schools where the children learn that the Earth is 4,000 years old, evolution is government propaganda, etc. Even worse, many are homeschooling their children and while some of these children may thrive I think it's pretty safe to assume that Christian conservatives in the US today are raising very few future scientists and engineers...

[Aizmov]

I guess I was a bit (maybe quite a lot) wrong on my comments on Liberal Arts, maybe they need to give it another name. I tend to not take anything Liberal seriously

The overwhelming majority of problems that humans face in this world, both as individuals and as groups, cannot be solved with 2+2=4 type thinking. They require abstract thinking from educated minds, not engineering solutions. All Liberal Arts studies are studies of the human condition, certainly the most relevant knowledge to humans living in a civilized world.

That is true but not how my brain works. Usually for me everything can be broke down to a possibility that falls between 0 and 1.

Science without humanity and knowledge without character are the vices of society. Technology is useless if we do not have the policy and laws to cope with it. Bombs and tanks are dangerous if you do not have the character to use them without restraint. A tool is only as good as the way it is used, and to create them for irresponsible people is much more detrimental to a society than not creating them at all.

True, but isn't that something we are born with? Humans are inherently good, I don't think Liberal Arts teach us how to be human..

Another important factor to consider is the role of Religious Fundamentalists here in the US. These people frown on some of the very basic concepts of biology, physics, archaeology, etc. and they are increasingly sending their children to religious schools where the children learn that the Earth is 4,000 years old, evolution is government propaganda, etc.

That is just horrible.. What a population wasted on medieval superstition!

[MetalKnight]

True, but isn't that something we are born with? Humans are inherently good, I don't think Liberal Arts teach us how to be human..

Liberal Arts doesn't teach us how to be humans, it teaches us about humans.

Consider this aspect, why did the United States cling to the Allied Powers during the Great War or World War II when they could have done just as well by aligning with the Axis/Central Powers?

One things humans tend to do, is try to remove the face of the person they're killing. Forget the fact that gun you're shooting may kill a man- a husband, a brother, a son, an uncle, a person who's waiting to get back home, a person who's wanted back home. At this point of time, they're the enemy, shoot to kill. They're Krauts and Japs - and they're in your way.

Cultural links and appreciation may not solve everything, but they surely make well for a stumbling block towards war. In today's modern society, I think the overwhelming majority of Americans would be wary of going to war with Great Britian, when our culture has grown and thrived together. Hollywood, Tolkien, Rowling, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, and Shaun of the Dead may seem like useless entertainment, but bind a human face and a respect between our societies. The same hold true when we see a Chinese martial arts movie or Japanese anime/manga. To study a cultural uniqueness allows people understand and respect each other rather than go to war, and let opt to abuse and exploit the technology and weaponry we have.






Now those towel-heads and those Kim Jong-ils... They're another thing.


(No I'm not really against arabs, but do you see the point?)

[Midnight Rambler]

...Now those towel-heads and those Kim Jong-ils... They're another thing.


(No I'm not really against arabs, but do you see the point?)

Yes. And welcome to the forums! I think you and I are going to get along just fine...

[Aizmov]

Liberal Arts doesn't teach us how to be humans, it teaches us about humans.

Consider this aspect, why did the United States cling to the Allied Powers during the Great War or World War II when they could have done just as well by aligning with the Axis/Central Powers?

One things humans tend to do, is try to remove the face of the person they're killing. Forget the fact that gun you're shooting may kill a man- a husband, a brother, a son, an uncle, a person who's waiting to get back home, a person who's wanted back home. At this point of time, they're the enemy, shoot to kill. They're Krauts and Japs - and they're in your way.

Cultural links and appreciation may not solve everything, but they surely make well for a stumbling block towards war. In today's modern society, I think the overwhelming majority of Americans would be wary of going to war with Great Britian, when our culture has grown and thrived together. Hollywood, Tolkien, Rowling, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, and Shaun of the Dead may seem like useless entertainment, but bind a human face and a respect between our societies. The same hold true when we see a Chinese martial arts movie or Japanese anime/manga. To study a cultural uniqueness allows people understand and respect each other rather than go to war, and let opt to abuse and exploit the technology and weaponry we have.






Now those towel-heads and those Kim Jong-ils... They're another thing.


(No I'm not really against arabs, but do you see the point?)

Wow.. I do understand what you are trying to say!

[Ollie]

The success of a piece of art completely depends completely on the perspective of it's audience. An artist can't control that, they can only create a piece of art and hope it holds water. Thus the impact is completely luck-based.

Not quite. Artists grow up surrounded by the influence of other people. Those that try to appeal to their target audience (for example, anime artists) know what sources to tap into to make their art sell. All artists who make a living do this regardless of what kind of art they are selling, and you can't rely on luck alone to be able to pay rent every month.

Now, there ARE pieces that fail to create the right response or any response from an audience. This is either because the audience or parts of it don't work with the piece, or more likely the artist is inept.

"Granted, there's more to beauty" alone makes my point.

You make an incredibly flimsy point, then. I suggest you re-think it for a little bit.

The image I linked to was there for a point; there IS logic and there ARE rules to beauty on a physical aspect, as well as mental. A person could look at a Quasimodo and think "Damn, that's hot!" but that sort of individual is a rarity and an exception to general rules of physical beauty (such as symmetry).

[Wio]

Not quite. Artists grow up surrounded by the influence of other people. Those that try to appeal to their target audience (for example, anime artists) know what sources to tap into to make their art sell. All artists who make a living do this regardless of what kind of art they are selling, and you can't rely on luck alone to be able to pay rent every month.

Whether or not an anime becomes popular, mediocre, or even gets published is quite luck-based. Most responsible artists do have backup plans because they understand the risk of being an artist.

The image I linked to was there for a point; there IS logic and there ARE rules to beauty on a physical aspect, as well as mental. A person could look at a Quasimodo and think "Damn, that's hot!" but that sort of individual is a rarity and an exception to general rules of physical beauty (such as symmetry).

Are you limiting beauty to sexual appeal? I'm just wondering.

You do realize that my original statement was "A person can't be absolutely ugly"? One exception defeats absoluteness.

[demonplight]

beauty is a form, thus no one can be "beauty", one can only the closest thing to it, or from it.

[Inamorata]

I'm the form of sexiness. Wo0t! Beauty is the form of mah shoes. Lol. Joking. Yeah Plight is right its just a apperence, true beauty comes from within.

[Ollie]

You do realize that my original statement was "A person can't be absolutely ugly"? One exception defeats absoluteness.

A person can't be absolutely ugly, okay, but they sure as hell can never be attractive in any form. (On that note, what's interesting is you could find someone physically attractive, but when you come to know they're really awful, hate-able people, they suddenly become quite a bit less good-looking!). Though there is a line where no one is going to find something attractive, so, I think technically you're wrong.

We're really going off-topic now with this discussion, though.