4 ms·
For more information on this see C.P. Snow's over half-century-old lecture, "The Two Cultures." Within it he posits a great rift between the humanities and the
by ryanklee 15y ago
For more information on this see C.P. Snow's over half-century-old lecture, "The Two Cultures." Within it he posits a great rift between the humanities and the sciences. The lecture is very much relevant to this discussion. As a side note, Edge.org posits itself as an abridging third culture in direct relation to antagonisms between the humanities and sciences. Also on this front is 3 Quarks Daily, which is a more or less excellent feed of multi-discplinary geekdom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._P._Snow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._P._Snow
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures
http://edge.org/ http://edge.org/
http://www.3quarksdaily.com/ http://www.3quarksdaily.com/
- crux_ 15y agoGreat info, but a clarification of my comment may be in order: I wasn't talking about the "sciences" vs "humanities" divide (which is huge), but a divide that goes deeply within humanities itself, which is much more of a left/right divide (hence the "leftist" wording in the original article).
- ryanklee 15y agoDo you mind expanding on this? I am having trouble seeing an internal divide within the humanities between those that want a continuation of the study of lit and phil and those that would like to see it cease. The reasoning that normally goes into the defense of lit and phil seems to be essential to the reasoning that might go into the defense of any sub-field of the humanities. Do you mean to posit an alliance of lit and phil with leftist politics and everything else with rightist politics?
- crux_ 15y agoI was being a bit tongue-in-cheek with the "1950" comment, is all -- making fun of one camp's deep backlash against post-modernism (among many other things).