3 ms·

There's a very good reason why this argument comes up again and again. STEM disciplines are in the analytic philosophy tradition (at least the ones that are an

There's a very good reason why this argument comes up again and again. STEM disciplines are in the analytic philosophy tradition (at least the ones that are any good). For the most part, liberal arts are in the continental philosophy tradition (this wasn't always the case). There can be no peace, or even understanding between the two schools of thought.

chadgeidel 12y ago
Thank you for this. I always wondered why I continually "butt heads" with some of my friends when discussing philosophy-related topics. I am not well-versed (being CS) and thought it was merely due to my lack of background. Of course - I still lack background in "continental philosophy", but this helps my understanding.
Apocryphon 12y ago
What is your definition of STEM disciplines, and what is your definition of the liberal arts?
tjradcliffe 12y ago
It's closer to say that the analytic philosophy tradition grew out of STEM (especially M) roots, via people like Russel and Whitehead. "Analytic philosophy" is a phenomenon of the 20th century, while STEM fields go back anywhere from centuries to millenia. I do agree that the current (and hopefully transient) dominance of continental philosophy in the liberal arts makes it more difficult for people in those areas to grasp STEM fields, and would furthermore say that since "STEM people need more liberal arts training!" has been the call for my entire decades-long career (and likely before) there is unlikely to ever be anything that satisfies people. I've been in grad courses in philosophy where a solid minority of students were from the sciences, but never seen more than one or two people (always from philosophy) even in undergrad physics classes. It's time to turn things around and say, "Liberal arts people need more STEM training! No one should be able to graduate from university who doesn't have at least some grounding in math, computing and a science." Unfortunately, if you extend this requirement beyond "physics for poets" the graduation rate drops to nearly zero, despite there being English, music, philosophy and history majors out there who make wickedly good software developers. But they are such a tiny minority as to barely count.

chadgeidel 12y ago

Thank you for this. I always wondered why I continually "butt heads" with some of my friends when discussing philosophy-related topics. I am not well-versed (being CS) and thought it was merely due to my lack of background. Of course - I still lack background in "continental philosophy", but this helps my understanding.

Apocryphon 12y ago

What is your definition of STEM disciplines, and what is your definition of the liberal arts?

tjradcliffe 12y ago

It's closer to say that the analytic philosophy tradition grew out of STEM (especially M) roots, via people like Russel and Whitehead. "Analytic philosophy" is a phenomenon of the 20th century, while STEM fields go back anywhere from centuries to millenia. I do agree that the current (and hopefully transient) dominance of continental philosophy in the liberal arts makes it more difficult for people in those areas to grasp STEM fields, and would furthermore say that since "STEM people need more liberal arts training!" has been the call for my entire decades-long career (and likely before) there is unlikely to ever be anything that satisfies people. I've been in grad courses in philosophy where a solid minority of students were from the sciences, but never seen more than one or two people (always from philosophy) even in undergrad physics classes. It's time to turn things around and say, "Liberal arts people need more STEM training! No one should be able to graduate from university who doesn't have at least some grounding in math, computing and a science." Unfortunately, if you extend this requirement beyond "physics for poets" the graduation rate drops to nearly zero, despite there being English, music, philosophy and history majors out there who make wickedly good software developers. But they are such a tiny minority as to barely count.