This thread is permanently archived
Why students of Humanities are often connected to the Socialists, leftists?
| Mm... stereotypes.
| I study humanities and am leftist as well. it's interesting stereotype. Maybe we humanitarians value human connections and society in general? idk interesting to think about
| I'm mathnat student and leftist. But it's true: most mathnats are "unpolitical" or political naive. Digital na(t)ives.
The interesting question is, where is the political right present in the academic world. I would guess mostly in economics, politics, law and military. And also maybe in marketing.
| >>372137 I noticed how majority of IT students are apolitical. Guess should be expected they have their own world heh
| >>372143
They HAD their own world. The last 20 years development in the it sector was pretty destructive by limiting information technology to the analogue worlds limits. Terms like "piracy" say it all. IT giants are pretty successful in monopolizing the market, and governments rather invest in mass surveillance instead guarantee peoples privacy against IT companys.
| >>372137
& history. History is perhaps the most politicized topic of study I've encountered. The US Civil War is a particularly monumental example.
Historically, I believe student political movements were statistically more linked to students of literature, economics & art. I suppose they're the ones who think about the world of men rather than that of numbers or of particles.
| Maybe it's because they're well educated on the way things go historically speaking.
| >>372280
...you actually may be onto something. More than one professor has told me that the reasoning behind making social/philosophical/humanities credits necessary in some schools is to encourage a student to be, if not well rounded, then at least -aware- of social issues as opposed to being only STEM-literate.
Whether that actually works, or just becomes another class to power through/brute memorize without retaining anything, though, is up to the student.
| Consider that at my alma mater, shortly after several scandals of targeted racism and sexual assault on campus, the curriculum/requirements to graduate was slightly altered to include at least a couple credits in a "diversity" class of some kind. I myself chose Women in Literature, which, to its credit, wasn't a bad class... even if I didn't invest as much time in it as I should have.
Would this change affect the level of racial intolerance/misogyny on campus? Who can say?
| In this anon's opinion, I would say... no. Because there's no guarantee that being required to take a course focusing on a specific minority or on women would prevent that person from being a racist or a rapist. That's entirely on the individual.
Though I admit, for people who aren't already like that, they *may* become educated in an area that they were originally ignorant of.
I had no idea until a class in highschool that genocide is still practiced, for example.
| A stem student has far too much to study as is. If you add a "diversity class" into the mix, they're very likely to ignore it. Just like how any other students would not focus on things outside of their degree. Social sciences are fairly connected with one another but they won't go through stem subjects. At best you're looking at the statistics course.
If the stem student is particularly tallented, then maybe they'd be able to assimilate the extra information.
| And then I'd add as a question. Why should stem students bother with politics when they have far too much to focus on as is? What could a doctor contribute that any other person could not? This just seems like the current administrative trend in the West where buzzwords like diversity are put into a space for learning. In doing so people will either learn less or learn useless information.
| >>372728
To be honest, I'd rather have someone with knowledge or a background in specific concentrations for political leaders rather than politicians, whose backgrounds are often just "law." Much of the disconnect between our leaders and the departments they oversee has largely to do with subject ignorance. Doctors should oversee Department of Healths, people with masters of education should run the Department of Education, etc.
| The problem with electing lawyers to do this is that knowing law doesn't mean you'll do what is best for the subject you're entrusted with. All it means is you know how to manipulate the law in your favor, and how to write new laws to support your goals, at the expense of others.
So in that way, I think it is especially important for STEM majors to become involved in politics; especially since it will often be people uneducated in their own fields who dictate what they're
| allowed to do with their knowledge anyway.
| Clarification: *It will be people with no background in your field of expertise, telling you what you can or cannot do with said expertise.
This thread is permanently archived
| I study Humanities and I no support these ideas.