3 ms·
I think of the underlying faults with that point of view on liberal arts education, one stands above all others. As holder of an engineering bachelors, I'll ane
by tel 16y ago
I think of the underlying faults with that point of view on liberal arts education, one stands above all others. As holder of an engineering bachelors, I'll anecdotally attest to the widely known problem that
Undergraduate engineering degrees actively discourage building communication skills.
This above all else is the heart of that linear thinking problem. Many graduating engineers in the US are communication challenged. They can't perform a principled arguments, write evocatively, perform convincing. They lack the skills to perform critical analysis of other communication, any sort of eye for subtlety, and flat out lack the appreciation of good writing.
It's often explained away as if there is this single choice people make when they're young that they'll either be good at math/science or literature/history. Once you've made that choice, you're stuck socially, psychologically, practically. But that's okay, goes the argument, specialization is necessary and everybody is one-sided, really.
So despite wide knowledge of this problem, schools combat it by deliberately watered-down english classes designed to not damage engineering GPAs. My alma mater required two english classes, both of which I got near perfect grades in by skipping class and writing half-minded, fantastical leaps of literary analysis on books I'd skimmed. I got perfect scores and remarks like "This is the best paper I've ever read". Literally. It also required a single semester "technical communication" course where we were introduced to business letter etiquette and the definition of genre.
As a firm believer that writing something down is the fastest, most powerful method to clarifying your thoughts, I find it despicable that engineering colleges don't provide these challenges. I find it corrosive that the dominant societal perspective is that it's ok if you can't write because you're an engineer. I think this directly leads to the sort of creativity rot I saw, all the time, in classmates.
My experiences may be anecdotal and localized to my college, which is one of the top engineering colleges in the US. I hope it is, and that this disgust is misdirected, but really I think it's larger than that.
---
tl;dr? I'm completely convinced that a dreadful number of engineers are missing something central to anyone who wants to deal in complex ideas entirely because it's considered a liberal arts speciality. They're weak at techniques to critically and clearly articulate or analyze ideas aloud or in writing, the art and science of human communication.
(I'll also note that so far a huge part of the advice of how to survive graduate school is learning to write. People tell me it with the look in their eyes that says they've seen so many people fail miserably because of this sudden, new expectation. I'm know my writing needs a lot of improvement, but I know that of many of the people in my graduating class, many would require a near complete literary reversal before they could actually publish.)
</rant>
(Edit: made it more clear that I'm not arguing with what sudont said. Written communication is hard.)
- sudont 16y agoUm: “There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things”. Tim Bray quoting Phil Karlton If you haven’t heard that quote, hopefully it’ll conceptually expand to where my post completely agrees with you. If it doesn’t, I completely agree with you. My arts degree helps me think laterally in the extreme.
- tel 16y agoAh, cool. Hadn't heard the quote actually, hah, though I was pretty sure you weren't completely hardline serious that you'd summed up the benefits of liberal arts education. You just tipped off a complaint I had (and have) building up inside. We're in the same boat, argumentatively. I'm just speaking (yelling, crying) from the other side.
- _delirium 16y agoI definitely agree with that: many of the skills I've used as a CS grad student came directly from my philosophy minor, not from my CS bachelor's degree. Being able to construct or refute an argument, writing 6-to-20-page essays, etc. Writing in CS isn't the same as writing in philosophy, but at least the philosophy classes gave me some grounding in it, which was totally lacking in the CS curriculum. The other big thing I got out of philosophy but not CS: how to frame and motivate a problem. In undergrad CS, you're usually solving problems that come prepackaged: someone has already posed this problem, developed the framework in which you're expected to come up with a solution, etc., and your job is to find and explain the solution. But in CS research, sometimes >50% of the work can be in convincing someone that something is a problem to begin with, and moreover that it's a problem they should care about, and your way of framing the problem is a good one. Only then will they even bother to look at your proposed solution to the problem!