In Defense of Humanities

As universities across the country question the need for humanities education, John Landy, co-director of Stanford's Philosophy and Literature Initiative comes to the defense of literature. "Spending time in the presence of works of great beauty can powerfully change your life," he says.

Related story:

Stanford University:

Stanford News:

Stanford University Channel on YouTube:

[annaritter]

As a high school graduate searching for a path forward and a focus for college, this video really impacted me and helped me articulate exactly why the humanities had attracted me--and it's a great part thanks to John Landy here that I am studying philosophy currently. I am now in a program that incorporates the study of politics and economics into a philosophy degree, showing students how political and economic institutions that structure and determine our societies are shaped and created by philosophy. Philosophy is not an ivory tower pursuit: the most pivotal human decisions are founded on beliefs and reasoned out from a careful understanding of the world, and philosophy is just that. It teaches you to ask questions, to question assumptions, which develops a deeper understanding of everything you come into contact with. It prepares you to better handle anything or any career path you then choose. So, thank you, John Landy, from a grateful college student.

[rkwakernaak]

Words of wisdom in defense of humanities! And in defense of seizing opportunities to gain a detailed in-depth understanding of subjects we're really interested in, to learn what it is we really care about, to learn who it is we really are. Thanks for giving the permission to study something we're actually interested in, including economics! :-)

[PatGunn]

@mike81188 University is about self-betterment, not about a higher salary. People should make the most of that time in their lives because for many people, it's either the last time they really have access to people and resources that will force them to stretch their mind, or it's a time when they're best equipped to figure out the rest of their life thanks to constant exposure to new ideas and people different from wherever they grew up. Humanities are a big part of that.

[dannytibi]

@mike81188 Science begins with Philosophy, Einstein himself was a Philosopher and from what we can tell understood the value of the humanities: "All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree. All these aspirations are directed toward ennobling man's life, lifting it from the sphere of mere physical existence and leading the individual towards freedom. [...] universities — insofar as they live up to their true function — serve the ennoblement of the individual." - Albert Einstein

[chrischungy]

Your university degree is not about earning a living. It's how to live and why. Now pay us $200, 000 for this education.

[KevinAshonMe]

@mike81188 also philosophy is everything believe it or not. I have a friend in grad school who is in the philosophy department writing a thesis on quantum physics. All of philosophy and humanities are about these abstract ideas, engineering is not. College was never supposed to be about making money; trade schools were but not colleges. Professor Landy is arguing that college is not about making money, and for his audience--elite college students, it's true that majors do not matter.

[PatGunn]

@TBucker Of course I'm willing to deal with the consequences, both positive and negative.

Charity is a fine thing. So is use of taxation for a safety net. We don't want that safety net abused, but we do want it to be present and functional.

[freezingbeast]

@robertgfthomas
The point is not to abolish humanities and history majors, but to ask the question of what the degree can do for you and society as a whole. If it makes you happy studying humanities, then go ahead. Just realize that you might not be able to utilize that degree later in life as easily as degrees in fields that are more in demand. (which might make you unhappy later in life)

Ultimately, just do what makes you happy, and DO consider the long term impact of your choices.

[pixelbind]

It suits my personality and marketing deals with creating and changing perceptions. I could change social norms. It allows me to tap into people and focus their energy into something more useful.

[npa]

@mike81188 The entire foundation of the sciences rest within a philosophical framework. It is generally held by many in the sciences that all of philosophy can be reduces to science, when in fact it is the exact opposite.
You can reduce the sciences to philosophy.
You seem to imply that elephants somehow have an understanding of value. But you statement about elephants doesn't indicate that. Do others have value? Elephants mourning on their loss doesn't imply that they think others have value.

[dannytibi]

@TBucker And your view of human beings as commodities who's worth can be measured in currency is at the root of a lot of the misery we have faced through much of human history.

[robertakarobin]

@TBucker You're absolutely right. Take Philosophy majors. When has anyone who studied philosophy ever added anything to society? Plato, Kant, those guys were morons who never contributed anything. Clearly, the only way to contribute to society is to come up with new ways of making money. Money is the only valuable thing in society. It's the only thing that creates happiness. We should just abolish art, music, philosophy, political science, history, and literature altogether.

[npa]

It seems that many commentators here feel that the fact that humanities may not help us survive means that it is of lower value than the sciences, which do help us survive with advanced technology. However, I suggest you to read THE APOLOGY, by Plato. If surviving was all that was to life, than Socrates wouldn't have thrown away his life for philosophizing.
"The unexamined life is not worth living." Socrates
"It is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied" John Stuart Mill
Cont.

[tbucker]

@dannytibi Feel free to do art, literature, and music. Just don't expect other people to pay your bills.

[Carutsu]

@qwe07 You've got a good point on that. But I think you cut it too short, nobody would tell you that CERN does practical experiments, at least not in the short term.

[qwe]

@Carutsu I see what you are saying, but how do we define "usefulness"? Are only studies with directly practical applications "useful"? I think it's unfortunate that there is a divide between the arts and sciences, where for some reason we pit one against the other.

[qwe]

@Carutsu ...but just to give an idea of how the two can coincide. Of course, whether or not artists today can compare to those of the past is another question. But then again I'm definitely biased in that respect.

[PatGunn]

@freezingbeast When did I suggest equalising all incomes among all jobs?

[qwe]

@Carutsu Well there would always be some degree of science involved in our lives as long as humans exist. You can also have it both ways; Christopher Wren was an scientist/architect, Borodin was a chemist/composer, and then there's the likes of Michelangelo and Leonardo, artist and scientists/inventors both. Then there are the early inventors of photography, such as Daguerre. Was he a scientist or an artist? Or both? These and several others are the exception rather than the rule...

[drinksupreme]

great stuff, I chose to study English literature and I'll stick with it