16 June 2022 by Shefali Mistry
Artwork by Yvonne Bee
I think the importance of reading is overrated, and quite frankly, antiquated. Perhaps it was a feat more valued in the “olden days;” but we live in 2022 and I strongly believe my time would be better spent learning how to code or understand quantum physics, rather than reading or writing or pondering existential and metaphysical questions. It doesnt realy mater if I no how to right -- we have auto-correct now! Scientists are smarter anyways. To put it simply, I don’t believe that the liberal arts are nearly as important or as relevant as STEM-related fields of expertise.
If you have agreed with me thus far, give yourself a little smack on the head for me.
There is a big misconception these days about the value of a liberal arts education, and what it means to be a liberal arts major. One of the most common errors is that, compared to a STEM-centered education, the liberal arts are perceived as less impressive and less applicable to career fields; however, this is far from the truth.
Associate Professor of English at Cal Poly Jay Peters shares his perspective on the topic: “I think there is a really clear career path that is established through some of the STEM majors,” he articulated. “The training is geared toward preparing them for specific kinds of jobs.”
Peters also suggests that there is often a utilitarian or instrumentalist (the idea that something is meant to be practical rather than attractive) approach to higher education, and that the acquisition of a certain degree is what qualifies you for a certain kind of career. It is overwhelmingly easy for us to forget that college majors don’t define our futures. They are GPSes meant to assist us, but don’t forget, you can reach your destination without a GPS. There are so many different ways to reach the same goal and no wrong answers, only different options.
Liberal arts majors are taught various “soft” skills — like writing, reading and analysis — that don’t seem to have a direct pipeline to the professional world. It is this softness, however, that encapsulates the substantial applicability of these skills, according to Philosophy Department Chair and Major Advisor Ken Brown.
Brown emphasized that these “soft” skills “are so broadly applicable to almost any kind of human enterprise, that it does not require very definite, particular or professional training.”
It is important to shift our perspective from the erroneous, and rather false, notion that liberal arts majors drown in futility, and illuminate the truthful and sincere value of the liberal arts.
As Brown puts it, there is an unfortunate and fallacious, “zero-sum” mentality people take on when discussing the battle between liberal arts and STEM — if you place value on one, you somehow devalue the other. It’s tantamount to the timeless question siblings ask their parents: “Which one of us do you love more?” And of course, “I love you both equally” or “I love you both in different ways” never seems to be a satisfactory answer.
Perhaps the biggest difference between a STEM-centered education and a liberal arts-centered education comes down to the nature of asking questions. Peters suggests there is a misunderstanding between liberal arts and STEM about what critical thinking is. As a professor of English, he tries to mold his students into “flexible thinkers who are aware of the complexity of an issue but also recognize the legitimacy of multiple perspectives on very complex issues.”
Peters says the cardinal disparity is that critical thinking for liberal arts is more contextualized, in comparison to STEM’s approach of critical thinking, which consists of trying to isolate a problem and solve it. With liberal arts, there exists more nuance and flexibility in thought, whereas with STEM, thought is more of a formulaic process.
Brown similarly touches on this idea: “The liberal arts puts you in a position of raising large scale questions about the world that are, in a way, taken for granted as answerable in other kinds of disciplines.”
Now, my intent isn’t to try to convince you that liberal arts are better than STEM; that is an impossible debate to argue, and as unsatisfying as it seems, the debate would inevitably end with a “I love you both in different ways” kind of conclusion.
So is reading really overrated? Is autocorrect really the cure-all for the disease of writing? Scientists are smart, but so are authors, journalists, lawyers and artists. Whether or not you agree with me is beside the point, really. I trust you can use your own critical thinking skills to lead you to your own conclusion.