4 ms·

I studied art on my own for a long period of time, and I find that it helped me understand things like information design, human resource management, and promot

I studied art on my own for a long period of time, and I find that it helped me understand things like information design, human resource management, and promotion strategies -- many of the "soft skills" that most engineering schools do not stress upon. I believe that education in humanities does not incapacitate people in any way, and the "critical thinking" skill it teaches is actually an extremely worthwhile and essential skill. However, there is a perception (based on some legitimate evidence) that it is easier to "wing it" in college if you are majoring in humanities. In other words, the very best humanities graduates may indeed be all very smart, however the portion of people who winged it while in college is probably higher among the humanities majors (it's hard to get away with a wrong math answer). So if you have little people experience, hiring an engineering graduate can be a "safer" bet depending on your industry. Which leads to engineers being biased to hiring other engineers. I personally believe that both "soft" and "hard" skills are desirable (but of course I am biased myself since I believe that I possess both...)

imgabe 15y ago
I agree that critical thinking is an important skill, but doesn't a science / engineering education teach this just as well?
- bluekeybox 15y ago
  The way I see it, the difference between the main method taught in the hard sciences (the empirical or scientific method) and between critical thinking as taught in the humanities is that the latter does not frown upon "intuitive" knowledge the way the first one does. In the empirical method, you are encouraged to put on a blindfold and pretend to be perfectly unbiased when making a decision. That works very well for things about which you can actually pretend to be unbiased. Less so for things where you have to make conclusions based on your life experience. Critical thinking (as opposed to the scientific method) becomes important when doing things like hiring people. I cannot afford to go outside, put on a mask, randomly sample people, spend a few years with each, write down the results, and generate a correctly averaged profile of my perfect employee. On the other hand, I do have an intuitive "feeling" for what type of people I am compatible with, what type of person is most likely to be smart and productive, and I have to make decisions based on this. At the same time I have to take into account my own biases. Critical thinking as taught in the humanities is about balancing biases, while the empirical method as taught in the hard sciences is about attempting to remove bias altogether. The latter is superior but very expensive.
irahul 15y ago
> information design, human resource management, and promotion strategies -- many of the "soft skills" that most engineering schools do not stress upon. Engineering schools aren't there to teach you human resource management and promotional strategies. When people need it, they pick it up on their own, like you claim to have done. Most of the startups run by engineers do their own promotion and management - is their something you learnt which says you can do it better than the engineers who are doing it? I highly doubt it. I am not putting you down - I am just saying the things as they appear to me. Information design, in the sense of good UX, is picked by people who have the knack for it; others hire help. UX is largely a black art and I would rather trust someone with a track record than someone who claims to have learnt it while studying art. > and the "critical thinking" skill it teaches is actually an extremely worthwhile and essential skill Critical thinking is important. What does humanities do which teaches critical thinking, and what do CS programs do which hampers critical thinking? If anything, hard sciences are supposed to inculcate critical thinking. > Which leads to engineers being biased to hiring other engineers. That's called heuristics. If the project needs an engineer, why would I go looking for a non-engineer? If you don't have a degree, but a track record, that's fine. But why on earth would I care about you humanities degree.

imgabe 15y ago

I agree that critical thinking is an important skill, but doesn't a science / engineering education teach this just as well?

bluekeybox 15y ago
The way I see it, the difference between the main method taught in the hard sciences (the empirical or scientific method) and between critical thinking as taught in the humanities is that the latter does not frown upon "intuitive" knowledge the way the first one does. In the empirical method, you are encouraged to put on a blindfold and pretend to be perfectly unbiased when making a decision. That works very well for things about which you can actually pretend to be unbiased. Less so for things where you have to make conclusions based on your life experience. Critical thinking (as opposed to the scientific method) becomes important when doing things like hiring people. I cannot afford to go outside, put on a mask, randomly sample people, spend a few years with each, write down the results, and generate a correctly averaged profile of my perfect employee. On the other hand, I do have an intuitive "feeling" for what type of people I am compatible with, what type of person is most likely to be smart and productive, and I have to make decisions based on this. At the same time I have to take into account my own biases. Critical thinking as taught in the humanities is about balancing biases, while the empirical method as taught in the hard sciences is about attempting to remove bias altogether. The latter is superior but very expensive.

irahul 15y ago

> information design, human resource management, and promotion strategies -- many of the "soft skills" that most engineering schools do not stress upon. Engineering schools aren't there to teach you human resource management and promotional strategies. When people need it, they pick it up on their own, like you claim to have done. Most of the startups run by engineers do their own promotion and management - is their something you learnt which says you can do it better than the engineers who are doing it? I highly doubt it. I am not putting you down - I am just saying the things as they appear to me. Information design, in the sense of good UX, is picked by people who have the knack for it; others hire help. UX is largely a black art and I would rather trust someone with a track record than someone who claims to have learnt it while studying art. > and the "critical thinking" skill it teaches is actually an extremely worthwhile and essential skill Critical thinking is important. What does humanities do which teaches critical thinking, and what do CS programs do which hampers critical thinking? If anything, hard sciences are supposed to inculcate critical thinking. > Which leads to engineers being biased to hiring other engineers. That's called heuristics. If the project needs an engineer, why would I go looking for a non-engineer? If you don't have a degree, but a track record, that's fine. But why on earth would I care about you humanities degree.