2 ms·

> 11 years ago was 2009. Now that's depressing. > It's an artifact of the culture of western aristocrats. There are elements of truth in what you said. But

> 11 years ago was 2009. Now that's depressing. > It's an artifact of the culture of western aristocrats. There are elements of truth in what you said. But liberal education is also the bedrock of western education and knowledge which includes STEM fields. Every stem field was created and advanced by those who came from "liberal arts education". Also, liberal arts education has always included math and science. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts_education Liberal arts education created the western world order. It's why the west is on top. It would be counterproductive to discard it. Perhaps we should just increase the share of STEM within the overall liberal arts education system?

username90 7y ago
> Also, liberal arts education has always included math and science. Math and physics are solidly on the STEM side when people argue the merits of STEM vs liberal arts. So instead of arguing semantics, understand what people mean. When they say "Don't study STEM, study liberal arts" what they mean is not "Don't study the more practical sides of STEM like engineering, study the liberal arts side of STEM like Maths", but instead "Don't study anything which requires more math than Algebra 1".
- elfexec 7y ago
  > Math and physics are solidly on the STEM side when people argue the merits of STEM vs liberal arts. That's my point. I disagree with the assertion that STEM is separate from liberal arts education. Historically it hasn't been true. And it's not true today. > So instead of arguing semantics, understand what people mean. Not arguing semantics. I understand what people mean and I am disagreeing with them and I provided sources and historical proof. > When they say "Don't study STEM, study liberal arts" Who says don't study STEM, study liberal arts? > but instead "Don't study anything which requires more math than Algebra 1". You've built up an exaggeration of the side you are arguing against. That's not an honest portrayal of the issue at hand. You can study both science/engineering/etc and history/philosphy/politics/etc. It's called getting a well rounded liberal arts education. The backbone of science, technology, engineering and math along with philosophy, history, politics, etc. My suggestion was increase the amount of "STEM" within the liberal arts education system we already have - particularly the technology and engineering. It's not an either-or issue that people like to portray it as.
  - username90 7y ago
    > Who says don't study STEM, study liberal arts? The article we are commenting on.
    - mcrad 7y ago
      Which part? Definitely didn't pick up on that. I think you might have blown out of proportion the more subtle argument he was making. > My objection is that all this talk about STEM is just the latest way to keep our schools focused exclusively on vocational training

username90 7y ago

> Also, liberal arts education has always included math and science. Math and physics are solidly on the STEM side when people argue the merits of STEM vs liberal arts. So instead of arguing semantics, understand what people mean. When they say "Don't study STEM, study liberal arts" what they mean is not "Don't study the more practical sides of STEM like engineering, study the liberal arts side of STEM like Maths", but instead "Don't study anything which requires more math than Algebra 1".

elfexec 7y ago
> Math and physics are solidly on the STEM side when people argue the merits of STEM vs liberal arts. That's my point. I disagree with the assertion that STEM is separate from liberal arts education. Historically it hasn't been true. And it's not true today. > So instead of arguing semantics, understand what people mean. Not arguing semantics. I understand what people mean and I am disagreeing with them and I provided sources and historical proof. > When they say "Don't study STEM, study liberal arts" Who says don't study STEM, study liberal arts? > but instead "Don't study anything which requires more math than Algebra 1". You've built up an exaggeration of the side you are arguing against. That's not an honest portrayal of the issue at hand. You can study both science/engineering/etc and history/philosphy/politics/etc. It's called getting a well rounded liberal arts education. The backbone of science, technology, engineering and math along with philosophy, history, politics, etc. My suggestion was increase the amount of "STEM" within the liberal arts education system we already have - particularly the technology and engineering. It's not an either-or issue that people like to portray it as.
- username90 7y ago
  > Who says don't study STEM, study liberal arts? The article we are commenting on.
  - mcrad 7y ago
    Which part? Definitely didn't pick up on that. I think you might have blown out of proportion the more subtle argument he was making. > My objection is that all this talk about STEM is just the latest way to keep our schools focused exclusively on vocational training