For Discussion: Science and the Liberal Arts

[Semorasmith]

Science and the Liberal Arts

Submitted for discussion by Don Clarke, Senior Chemists Committee Member

A traditional liberal arts education emphasizes the humanities, and many educational institutions in the U.S. and elsewhere have produced graduates who are illiterate in science. C. P. Snow, the British novelist and scientist, is famous for having commented on this topic. The following is from his 1959 Rede Lecture “The Two Cultures” (see wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures).

“A good many times I have been present at gatherings of people who, by the standards of the traditional culture, are thought highly educated and who have with considerable gusto been expressing their incredulity at the illiteracy of scientists. Once or twice I have been provoked and have asked the company how many of them could describe the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The response was cold: it was also negative. Yet I was asking something which is the scientific equivalent of: Have you read a work of Shakespeare’s?

“I now believe that if I had asked an even simpler question — such as, What do you mean by mass, or acceleration, which is the scientific equivalent of saying, Can you read? — not more than one in ten of the highly educated would have felt that I was speaking the same language. So the great edifice of modern physics goes up, and the majority of the cleverest people in the western world have about as much insight into it as their Neolithic ancestors would have had.

In 2008, The Times Literary Supplement included The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution in its list of the 100 books that most influenced Western public discourse since the Second
World War.^” More recently, there is an increasing emphasis on STEM (science, technology engineering and math) education, here and abroad, often leading to the exclusion of the humanities. Singapore has a reputation of adapting this latter approach. Steven Lynn Bernasek, dean of faculty and professor of science at Yale-NUS College in Singapore states that his college has not gone in that direction. For your information as well as to be an item of discussion, his consideration of the debate about liberal education versus STEM education follows.

“Education in the liberal arts dates from the Greek and Roman times. From the trivium (grammar, rhetoric, logic) and the medieval European quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy), the liberal arts model has always included the sciences, both formal (logic, arithmetic, geometry) and natural (astronomy). 

“All of these were the required basis for the study of the advanced topics of philosophy and theology, and were what was expected for a person to be considered educated. 

“As this style of education developed, especially in the United States, the range of topics identified as a part of the liberal arts and sciences curriculum expanded, but has always included the humanities, the social sciences, the natural sciences and formal sciences (such as logic, pure and applied mathematics, statistics and computation). The aim of this modern system of education in the liberal arts and sciences is a broadly and deeply educated individual, who will live life as an engaged global citizen.   

“In recent years, there has been an ongoing debate about liberal arts versus STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education, with some in North America turning away from the liberal arts and sciences model in favor of highly specialized STEM degrees. Science is also sometimes considered to be a separate field from the liberal
arts. This view is not correct, historically or in current practice.

“The sciences are an integral part of the intellectual traditions that led to the modern liberal arts approach. The habits of mind leading to creativity and intellectual innovation in the sciences are no different from those in other fields. In addition to the joy one finds in understanding the natural and social world, scientific knowledge also has an impact on our ability to solve practical problems in the world, from issues related to health and the environment to problems of social and political organizations.

“At Yale-NUS College, a liberal arts college in Singapore, science is a basic component of our common curriculum – a linked set of courses taken by all students together. The flexibility of mind needed to embrace new ideas, new results and new situations is a key to the scientific method, so the study of science is particularly well suited to the liberal arts approach. This way of learning involves reading and evaluating what has been written about the physical world; being able to evaluate a quantitative argument; being comfortable with not knowing the answer but able to look for it effectively; and being able to solve a problem by posing the question well and using a broad suite of resources to address it.”

Above are some interesting points and counterpoints.  We are posting this article here with the thought that some readers may wish to contribute to a discussion. If interested, please post your comments.

[114494]

I have had a similar experience.  A few years ago, an artist whom I know was shocked to learn that I could not recognize a style of painting.  She stressed the importance of being creative.  I told her that every day I see creativity in the laboratory where new compounds are being created.  Materials that previously were not there now are.  She was not certain that synthesis of compounds qualified as creativity.  Surely the more general the education the better.  Is this concept now out of date?

[Jameschao]

I agree with the gist of this article that there seems to be a growing chasm between people knowledgeable about the sciences/technology and those in the humanities.  When I first went to college I failed to fully appreciate why a "liberal arts" education for scientists was the only path at virtually all major universities.  I now appreciate it that a well educated person does need to have some working knowledge of both camps, sciences vs. humanities.  It goes just beyond the problem of "ignorance".... it means that leadership and advocacy for policy in all human endeavors requires a working knowledge of both camps.  The great problems of society can be solved only when there is an appreciation of both the sciences and the humanities.  Increasingly, I am disturbed by what political leaders actually know about science when discussing funding, and how "facts" are being distorted for political purposes.  Similarly, we have science and technology leaders, who tend to bury their heads in the sand when weighing in on the use of weapons of mass destruction, such as nuclear, chemical, weapons, and biological warfare.  Let us as individuals start talking to other camps and educating each other about what kind of world we want to build.

[egmeyer]

It was C.P. Snow who originated "The Two Cultures..." in a book written after his stint with the British War Dept during WWII. He started discussions which have continued to the present day. Having weighed in on this topic about a year ago in a symposium here (Univ. of Wyoming), and being too lazy to formulate a new opinion, my thought is: The liberal arts should not be taken literally, but rather conceptually.Similarly science should be recognized for its thought process rather than its product.  So perhaps an understanding by all of us of liberal (and I am not talking about the present political liberal) thn\inking and scientific processing it may be possible to obtain a level of communication.

Gerry

[scooke]

"Either/or" always leads to bad results!  A newer acronym is STEAM, where the "A" stands for Arts.   A modestly-educated person in today's world needs a basic understanding of the humanities AND sciences!  A scientist MUST understand the humanities if they want to really have an influence in society, and anyone in society (everyone) really needs to understand both the "scientific method" and the impact of the various scientific disciplines have in modern life it they want to make rational decisions (or vote for those who will).

Whether in the 'hard' sciences or the humanities, there is a historical and useful reason that the ultimate designation of formal education is a Ph.D. - Doctor of PHILOSOPHY!

[nickzu]

I have had similar experiences on both sides. After my retirement as a chemist (solid state NMR spectroscopist) and being a serious collector of 18th century European ceramics, I began devoting time to what is known as cultural heritage science (CHS). In a recent talk I gave to a group of conservators and curators at the Art Institute of Chicago I prefaced my remarks by saying that "if you are a chemist, a collector and interested in CHS there is a certain inevitability about what you do in retirement." While CHS, sometimes also referred to as Technical Art History, is an established discipline (it has its own Gordon Conference and C&EN often publishes news about it under "Art and Artifacts") the field has also met with considerable opposition among art historians. I try to bridge this gap by pointing out to the complementarity of the History of Art and the History of Chemistry. Putting the history of artists' materials in a chemical-historical context and showing how advances in materials lead to advances in artistic expression (and vice versa) can be very effective and promote STEM efforts, but must also be recognized by the NSF and properly funded. The history of both chemistry and art is an integral part of the intellectual history of humanity.

[scooke]

Dear Nicholas,

Great example!  I do think that one of the best ways for scientists in general, and chemists in particular to get more people interested in learning science is to relate it to our everyday experiences with our own passions!  I often remind students that everything they look up (and need to learn) from a book now ONCE was discovered more by 'art' than 'science' by a person simply curious about WHY things were observed to be what they are.

With "high tech" all around us an a new paradigm for life experiences, I find it even more instructive in helping students through lab courses.  The grade there is much less about obtain the "correct" answer than it is about doing the experiments well and making good evaluations of their observations.  My own interests in graphic arts and music are often a bridge to chemistry for those whose primary interests are in the arts.

Whether retired (I am, too) or not, I highly recommend that ALL scientists get actively involved in communicating with the pubic at whatever level you feel comfortable.  The ACS has many good resources and helpful people!  My own focus is on elementary school grades, with occasional forays into high school.

Best regards,

Steven