Can you be more specific in why do you think that a stem major would need to also study humanities? Do you think studying humanities make you a superior being? A better human? Do you think the study of humanities is what gives people morals and people that had not study humanities are all sinners that would go to hell?
I’ve heard it all.
But I’m curious to hear one more. What way do you think truth about nature can be approached that it is not the scientific method?
I know that some people approach truth by dogma “this is true because I (or someone I like) say so” but I must never agree on that.
I can have all opinions about art that I want, same can you. As long as they are internally consistent probably both will be true. I think “art is what make people feel they are perceiving art” is better than “art is something that is made by someone who a subculture of the western world gives the rank of artist and that it was not made by a technology based on neural networks generation text-to-image as it was presented in the year 2021”. But both are still opinions, if you want something more solid you need the scientific method and experimentation.
Can you be more specific in why do you think that a stem major would need to also study humanities?
The fact that you would even ask this. Do you even know what they study in there? Speaking of rejecting knowledge, my guy, there is so much out there to learn. You have trapped yourself within the smallest box.
is better than “art is something that is made by someone who a subculture of the western world […]”
Mine is actually “art is communication,” but if being dishonest makes you feel better, go for it, buddy.
Just curious and for a good laugh.
Can you be more specific in why do you think that a stem major would need to also study humanities? Do you think studying humanities make you a superior being? A better human? Do you think the study of humanities is what gives people morals and people that had not study humanities are all sinners that would go to hell? I’ve heard it all.
But I’m curious to hear one more. What way do you think truth about nature can be approached that it is not the scientific method?
I know that some people approach truth by dogma “this is true because I (or someone I like) say so” but I must never agree on that.
I can have all opinions about art that I want, same can you. As long as they are internally consistent probably both will be true. I think “art is what make people feel they are perceiving art” is better than “art is something that is made by someone who a subculture of the western world gives the rank of artist and that it was not made by a technology based on neural networks generation text-to-image as it was presented in the year 2021”. But both are still opinions, if you want something more solid you need the scientific method and experimentation.
The fact that you would even ask this. Do you even know what they study in there? Speaking of rejecting knowledge, my guy, there is so much out there to learn. You have trapped yourself within the smallest box.
Mine is actually “art is communication,” but if being dishonest makes you feel better, go for it, buddy.