Oh dear, sense of humour bypass!
If they'd been around years ago I could have got my dad one of those t shirts.
Gransnet forums
Education
Every Undergraduate Should Study the Humanities
(101 Posts)From htis evening's Guardian:-
"----The mass slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians is one factor cited by scholars, lawyers and rights groups who say Israel is committing genocide.
“They’re thinking: ‘Oh I don’t think [I’ll get shot] because I’m wearing civilian clothes and I am not carrying a weapon and all that, but they were wrong,” said Raab, who majored in biology at the University of Illinois before joining the Israel Defense Forces. “That’s what you have snipers for.”
After Salem was shot, his father, Montasser, 51, rushed to the site, an-------"
Identified Israeli snipers have shot dead innocent civilians and devastated an entire family. One of the named snipers had a biology degree from the University of Illinois. If students of science and technology had humanities as a necessary part of their curriculum they would have had some teaching of normal human rights.
How rude. I am also married to a prof of engineering. Everyone is different, thank goodness,
Oh, for heaven's sake!
We are poking gentle fun at our husbands. It is allowed.
I have no idea whether it makes them more aware of basic human rights but it seems to me from many years of watching University Challenge that Science students know a lot more about the Humanities than Humanities students do about Science.
The research scientists in my family have plenty to say about the state of the world! I’m a mere Geographer myself.
If your engineer is boring, you have chosen the wrong engineer.
My engineer is not boring but the fundamentals of physics etc can be when explained in details. Apparently it's a lovely subject! 🤷♀️
We have more than one engineer in the family, not all of the male variety either.
And yes, being an engineer does not preclude them studying other subjects in retirement.
Doodledog 😁
I think the one sitting not far from me has always had difficulty realising that his wife is Always Right.
Doodledog
Oh, for heaven's sake!
We are poking gentle fun at our husbands. It is allowed.
I don't think it was your post which was thought rude!!
I may be wrong of course!
Rosie51
Oh dear, sense of humour bypass!
If they'd been around years ago I could have got my dad one of those t shirts.
No, the boring engineer trope is so hackneyed and has become a dead horse that too many people enjoy continually flogging.
Engineers get fed up with it, and hope if they ignore it, it will eventually go away. Unfortunately, it doesn't
DH isn't grumbling 😁
He just doesn't notice when my eyes glaze over.
No-one said engineers themselves are boring people.
Most have other interests too, I would think.
However, any subject which is not of interest to the listener could be boring if explained in great depth.
Where would the world be without engineers?
From Imhotep to Archimedes to Brunel to today's engineers they are needed.
Lathyrus3
So those who have studied humanities and then perform inhuman acts are “a few bad apples” whereas those who have studied sciences and perform inhuman acts are representative of the whole.
There really is nothing of logical thinking here.
I’mwith you on this Lathyrus
A total^non sequitur^ OP
I don’t get any connection at all.
Me neither.
As I said much earlier then went down a rabbit hole.
Are rabbits engineers?
Apparently yes. They are ecosystem engineers
Rabbits create different spatial subunits: warrens, warren influence area, latrines.
Certainly beavers are engineers.
M0nica
Rosie51
Oh dear, sense of humour bypass!
If they'd been around years ago I could have got my dad one of those t shirts.No, the boring engineer trope is so hackneyed and has become a dead horse that too many people enjoy continually flogging.
Engineers get fed up with it, and hope if they ignore it, it will eventually go away. Unfortunately, it doesn't
Maybe if yours doesn't have a sense of humour you have chosen the wrong one?
It was a joke. Based on the stereotyping of people based on their interests and/or expertise, and to the comment about how Humanities graduates can bore people to death, which nobody got angry about.
Lathyrus3
So those who have studied humanities and then perform inhuman acts are “a few bad apples” whereas those who have studied sciences and perform inhuman acts are representative of the whole.
There really is nothing of logical thinking here.
I don't aim to be logical. My idea, if I may try to explain better, is education in all subjects including hard sciences should include teaching empathy and if possible sympathy too .
Allira
Which subjects are included in the Humanities?
History, Religion, Geography (as a humanity rather than science subject), Literature, Classics etc.are all Humanity subjects.
I'm not sure of the logic of the argument or how it would change anything.
It's me not you. I am sometimes criticised for not joining up the dots in my explanations.
Id be interested to see an example of teaching empathy in Science or Maths.
I’m afraid I always want to know how something will actually work in practice.
No, sorry. I’ve gone away to take the chicken out of the oven, thinking about this.
The problem is your starting from a false premise which is that those who study Sciences lack empathy whilst those who study Humanities have
So anything you put in place in terms of developing empathy is already destined for failure because your starting point is false.
If you’re thinking about snipers you would need to research whether all or the majority had Science degrees. Your idea would stand or fall on the result of that. But at the moment it’s all circumstantial based on one sniper.
And now I will join the ranks of the boring😬
Dear Lord . So many errors in my post😳😳😳
I trained as a nurse during the 1970s and although it was only the very basic three year SRN qualification, we had to study anatomy and physiology, pharmacology and various other sciency things as well as nursing practise. Yet I would maintain that all good nurses need a very high level of empathy etc.
I believe that to qualify as a nurse you now have to a BSc degree so it must be much more science orientated than in my day although I am sure the same level of empathy etc is required.
Don't medical students have to study scientific subjects too?
I am not sure you can teach empathy etc. Either you have or you don't. I never practised as a staff nurse because I lacked the necessary commitment.
One area of the Humanities that I think everyone should study is philosophy. Philosophy courses will teach you how to carefully examine and construct arguments (as in, a point you would like to make, not a disagreement) and how to identify fallacies and weak points in arguments.
Even in science programs, philosophy is still important because it underpins all research methods. (Philosophy, for anyone who doesn't know, is comprised of four main areas: ethics, logic, metaphysics (the nature of the universe, nature of persons, etc.), and epistemology. Epistemology is the study of knowledge - how do we define knowledge, what can be known, etc. Consequently, epistemology underpins all research methods.)
I have a bachelor's and a master's degree in nursing, and I've taken three philosophy courses: one in general ethics and one in biomedical ethics in my bachelor's degree, and one in more general philosophy in master's degree. It was also a requirement to complete graduate ethics training prior to defending my thesis proposal. My experience has suggested to me that everyone should take at least two philosophy classes, because it can take some time to get your head around the concepts.
Teaching undergrads empathy and sympathy strikes me as far too late. If a person hasn’t learnt those skills by the age of 18 then I doubt very much they ever will. It needs to start from the cradle, by our own example.
Caleo
Lathyrus3
So those who have studied humanities and then perform inhuman acts are “a few bad apples” whereas those who have studied sciences and perform inhuman acts are representative of the whole.
There really is nothing of logical thinking here.I don't aim to be logical. My idea, if I may try to explain better, is education in all subjects including hard sciences should include teaching empathy and if possible sympathy too .
Empathy is not really something that can be taught.
SueDonim
Teaching undergrads empathy and sympathy strikes me as far too late. If a person hasn’t learnt those skills by the age of 18 then I doubt very much they ever will. It needs to start from the cradle, by our own example.
It’s never too late to develop empathy. Psychologist Daniel Goleman who wrote 'Emotional Intelligence' calls it the foundation of social skills, and like a muscle, it can grow stronger with use.
SueDonim
Teaching undergrads empathy and sympathy strikes me as far too late. If a person hasn’t learnt those skills by the age of 18 then I doubt very much they ever will. It needs to start from the cradle, by our own example.
Psychologist Daniel Goleman calls empathy the foundation of social skill. It can certainly be learned and taught. One way to learn it is from honest and expressive reportage. Goleman's book 'Emotional Intelligence' is worth reading and is widely endorsed by psychologists.
I suspect a child raised in a family without empathy for 18 years will need more than a few lectures to learn a new skill.
For the record, my DS is a professor and his university mandates Humanities courses for all new undergrads.
SueDonim
I suspect a child raised in a family without empathy for 18 years will need more than a few lectures to learn a new skill.
For the record, my DS is a professor and his university mandates Humanities courses for all new undergrads.
That’s interesting.
What’s their rationale for that?
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »