Nicholas Kristof: The Hubris of the Humanities.

[Democrats_win]

http://timworstall.typepad.com/timworstall/2005/12/nicholas_kristo.html

Ah, the war on the humanities. Did this conservative NY Times columnist not see "Dead Poets Society?"

[HereSince1628]

1. Science vs the deconstructionist/relativists is so 20th century.

I ain't even gonna bother reading it.

[MrModerate]

2. Actually, the people I hang out with . . .

Have read Dante and Dickens, AND know what a quark is (although most of us -- except the Six Sigma gurus -- can't handle a chi-square calculation).

But then again, I work for an engineering company that's made up of nearly 60 percent liberal-arts graduates, who've nevertheless grasped (and even studied) science and technology.

Is this as rare as Kristof suggests, or are those numbers of American flat-earthers he cites really a reflection of how people outside "professional" work environments don't (for whatever reason) take advantage of the inputs that would teach them the basics of current scientific thought? I mean, even the "Jurassic Park" series was pretty accurate regarding contemporary gene and paleontological theories.

And regarding Bush and stem cells: while it is possible that he's not a certifiable moron, he is clearly an incredible fool. "Bush didn't realize . . ." could be the intro to almost every pronouncement that's limped, broken-backed, out of his drooling smirk.

[Davis_X_Machina]

3. Sounds like...

...O'Reilly and Associates, the publisher's....

But then again, I work for an engineering company that's made up of nearly 60 percent liberal-arts graduates, who've nevertheless grasped (and even studied) science and technology

[MrModerate]

5. I saw "O'Reilly" and thought them wuz fightin' words . . .

And then read on.

Phew!

[Democrats_win]

4. Well said! In so many conservative ideas, we must ask, how bad is it

really? It goes back to the culture of fear in the 1980´s and even the terrorism fear of today.