Yale Daily News

"The meaning of life?" The humnanities has an entire contingent shouting "Life and the universe are meaningless."

Infiltrate and subvert, Michael. You may be the last of a dying breed.

Right on. Great to see that someone gets it. (Then again, I'd like to push back a bit and suggest that contemplation of the humanities CAN lead to some understanding of the bigger questions. Necessary but not sufficient, perhaps.)

The missing step in your argument is that perhaps it's COLLEGE as a whole that needs less justification. That is, society at large justifies college as a credentialling business that is a prerequisite for decent jobs. Really, I think the mission of a liberal arts college would be served better if people only came here for the sake of personal enrichment without expecting to profit worldly from the experience. It's the conflicted attitude about what college is for that leads to the misguided attempt to justify the humanities.

Great piece.

DPS had it right:

"We don't read and write poetry because it's cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. And medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for."

DPS is pop trash written for high school freshmen.

I stay alive for WHATEVER gives me a tingle down my back. For some, that's poetry. For others, it's math.

To each his own

Great article...I think you got it.
It's about the journey not the destination.

This piece is one of the best, most honest treatments of the topic that I have seen in any forum. Kudos to Mr. Harris!

You stay alive for whatever gives you a tingle down your back.

Math can't describe that tingle. Poetry can.

That's what Keating is saying. Perhaps you should adjust your opinion on said "pop trash written for high school freshmen," otherwise admit your comprehension level well below... because you missed the point.

#8, actually, you're missing roflcopter's point. To a mathematician, a beautiful concept or proof provides an aesthetic experience very similar to what literature or music might give you. Does poetry describe that tingle, for you, or does poetry CAUSE it?

Surely you know the Feynman quote: "Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it."

Michael Wayne Harris is a fine, upstanding young gentleman. Additionally, he is DA BOSS.

I've heard this response before, and I'm unconvinced since it just begs the question. I just don't get what it means for something to be "a satisfying activity in its own right". The author needs to go further and describe the satisfaction. I can get "pure joy" from a lot of things--what is it about the humanities that makes the joy from it better than the joy from baser activities? And if you're going to argue that we studying the humanities is tantamount to "what it means to be fully human", it seems like you have a circle where you're giving a prescription for human life--but what makes you qualified to give this prescription if you reject the claim that Humanities has some access to deeper truths? I'm not suggesting it does, although I tend to justify my studies to myself with versions of the first (building critical thinking) and the second (not so much being moral as much as living a more full life, although I think Humanities study in academia doesn't always or usually lead to this).

You find pleasure in studying Humanities. Fine. But let's not conflate pleasure with utility.

As the poets and artists of the world engage in self-righteous intellectual masturbation scientists and engineers will continue to solve the real problems facing our global society. Without them you'd be writing free verse on the walls of some cave with nothing more than a stick and a handful of your own poo.

Well that's just the thing. The poets of old were happy and content with that life; it was the scientists who didn't like it and the scientists would suffer if we went back in time.

Not the poets and artists.

Honestly, I don't see any "utility" to being a science or engineer. Where's the excitement? The glory? Curing AIDS or Cancer? Probably won't care otherwise. Engineers? Right; because i'm so flipping through the NYTimes to see what the local architects are up to.

And this is coming from a design kid!

While the Engineers and Scientists may "contribute" the "most" to society, look to annals of civilizations long past. Politicians, Militants, Poets, Authors, Artists, Celebrities... they are immortalized far more often than any of the aforementioned. And it is curious, too, that some of the most infamous scientists came to fame over science that is perfectly united with philosophy.

Relativity, anyone?

I began to write a comment to mock your post but I think it does that well enough on its own.

And this is coming from a chemistry kid!

Exactly. Because when you allude to witty retorts, we all know EXACTLY what you're thinking.