Of arts and science
28/05/24 01:27
Colleges typically award two types of undergraduate degrees. A Batchelor of Arts (BA) is awarded in fields where critical thinking, communication, and holistic learning are emphasized. The Batchelor of Science (BS) is awarded in fields where logic, reasoning, and quantitative skills are pursued. The distinctions are not always consistent and often based in subjective evaluations of career fields. From the perspective of a student, which type of degree is generally based on the student’s choice of major field of study. My degree, which focused on Christian Thought and Philosophy is a BA. My friend Steve earned his BS by focusing on mathematics. Generally, the major focus of an undergraduate studies and the type of degree earned has little impact on graduate studies. There are, however, some programs where undergraduate focus is important. For example medical schools generally accept those with BS degrees over those with BA degrees. Interestingly enough, our seminary had a mix of students who came with BA and BS degrees.
Undergraduate degrees in psychology can be either BA or BS degrees, based generally on the focus of a program and the coursework pursued by a student. Students leaning toward careers in social work and counseling often are awarded BA degrees, while those focusing on research and medicine are awarded BS degrees.
Looking back after a long career, I am grateful that I attended a relatively small college where students with different areas of academic focus regularly mixed and shared many activities. In our college there was no penalty for taking courses offered for other degree focuses. Although I was an arts student, I took logic from a mathematics professor. There was a lot of interplay between various course fields.
Students today often are counseled to be very focused in their studies. The high cost of college education has created pressure for students to pursue a course of study that will result in high paying work upon graduation.
I have long held deep respect for scientific study. My education did not involve hard core scientific study. My research was based in academic reading more than in laboratory experiments, but that did not result in any disrespect for quality research. Being educated has given me both a deep respect for science and an appreciation of the hard work that it takes.
However, the denial of science and distrust of scientific research is increasing. According to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey, trust in scientists has decreased by 14% since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. That erosion of trust is likely more the result of political decisions and policies than the work of scientists. Certainly opposition to vaccination and rejection of public health measures such as wearing face masks were stirred and encouraged by those wishing to make political gains out of the pandemic.
I worry about eroding trust in scientific research, especially when misrepresentation of science is used to make political gains. There are some notable examples of the misuse of scientific data that have contributed to a decrease of trust.
The tobacco industry engaged in a carefully orchestrated campaign using bits of data and incomplete information to instill doubt about the connection between tobacco use and cancer. Millions of smoking-related deaths from cancer and heart disease might have been prevented had industry leaders paid attention to the science. Instead research results were misrepresented and there was outright denial of well established fact.
The same tactics that were employed by the tobacco industry have been used by the oil industry to deny the scientific facts of climate change. The climate crisis that now engulfs us with increases in severe weather events, rising oceans, out of control wildfire, and unnecessary deaths of animals and people has grown out of the use of pseudo science to refute the scientific facts about climate change. Recently the oil industry has pivoted from its earlier denial of climate change to promoting the idea that hope is lost. They point to positive changes such as the increase in sustainable energy production and say that those solutions are too small to work. Considerable funds are invested in denying the effects of changes that people are making to lessen their carbon footprints.
As a student of philosophy, I can see that misrepresentation of facts has been a problem throughout human history. Ours isn’t the first generation to misuse bits of evidence to deny the results of scientific study. However, the rise of the Internet and the increased use of social media to manipulate public opinion present new challenges to those who seek to communicate the results of scientific research. People put up websites and post on Facebook and engage in misinformation. There is a difference between a real expert who has data and evidence to present and one who uses social media to promote an agenda. The sheer quantity of information available on the Internet makes it challenging to find the quality science and careful interpretation of data that is also available.
Part of the solution to the problems of scientific denialism is for scientists to hone their skills at communication. The traditional structure of academic institutions with the distinction between the arts and science has resulted in trained scientists who do not have communication skills. It turns out, however, that the art of communication is essential to the practice of science. As our society begins the process of re-thinking academic education, it may be time to soften the distinction between the arts and science. A well rounded education must involve both traditional arts skills and traditional scientific skills. The time may have come for our colleges and universities to re-think the use of the distinction between a BA and BS.
At the same time, colleges and universities need to continue to expand education about critical thinking to equip students with the skills necessary to detect and counter misinformation and misrepresentation of the facts. The mere possession of a few facts does not make a person educated. Knowing what to do with facts and evidence is critical. So far the Internet has not proven to be a good source of learning about critical thinking.
The protests on college campuses over the war in Gaza present an opportunity to look closely at the shape of academic education and to make necessary changes. I hope that administrators and professors don’t miss this opportunity to think holistically about education and begin to make some of the changes needed.
Undergraduate degrees in psychology can be either BA or BS degrees, based generally on the focus of a program and the coursework pursued by a student. Students leaning toward careers in social work and counseling often are awarded BA degrees, while those focusing on research and medicine are awarded BS degrees.
Looking back after a long career, I am grateful that I attended a relatively small college where students with different areas of academic focus regularly mixed and shared many activities. In our college there was no penalty for taking courses offered for other degree focuses. Although I was an arts student, I took logic from a mathematics professor. There was a lot of interplay between various course fields.
Students today often are counseled to be very focused in their studies. The high cost of college education has created pressure for students to pursue a course of study that will result in high paying work upon graduation.
I have long held deep respect for scientific study. My education did not involve hard core scientific study. My research was based in academic reading more than in laboratory experiments, but that did not result in any disrespect for quality research. Being educated has given me both a deep respect for science and an appreciation of the hard work that it takes.
However, the denial of science and distrust of scientific research is increasing. According to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey, trust in scientists has decreased by 14% since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. That erosion of trust is likely more the result of political decisions and policies than the work of scientists. Certainly opposition to vaccination and rejection of public health measures such as wearing face masks were stirred and encouraged by those wishing to make political gains out of the pandemic.
I worry about eroding trust in scientific research, especially when misrepresentation of science is used to make political gains. There are some notable examples of the misuse of scientific data that have contributed to a decrease of trust.
The tobacco industry engaged in a carefully orchestrated campaign using bits of data and incomplete information to instill doubt about the connection between tobacco use and cancer. Millions of smoking-related deaths from cancer and heart disease might have been prevented had industry leaders paid attention to the science. Instead research results were misrepresented and there was outright denial of well established fact.
The same tactics that were employed by the tobacco industry have been used by the oil industry to deny the scientific facts of climate change. The climate crisis that now engulfs us with increases in severe weather events, rising oceans, out of control wildfire, and unnecessary deaths of animals and people has grown out of the use of pseudo science to refute the scientific facts about climate change. Recently the oil industry has pivoted from its earlier denial of climate change to promoting the idea that hope is lost. They point to positive changes such as the increase in sustainable energy production and say that those solutions are too small to work. Considerable funds are invested in denying the effects of changes that people are making to lessen their carbon footprints.
As a student of philosophy, I can see that misrepresentation of facts has been a problem throughout human history. Ours isn’t the first generation to misuse bits of evidence to deny the results of scientific study. However, the rise of the Internet and the increased use of social media to manipulate public opinion present new challenges to those who seek to communicate the results of scientific research. People put up websites and post on Facebook and engage in misinformation. There is a difference between a real expert who has data and evidence to present and one who uses social media to promote an agenda. The sheer quantity of information available on the Internet makes it challenging to find the quality science and careful interpretation of data that is also available.
Part of the solution to the problems of scientific denialism is for scientists to hone their skills at communication. The traditional structure of academic institutions with the distinction between the arts and science has resulted in trained scientists who do not have communication skills. It turns out, however, that the art of communication is essential to the practice of science. As our society begins the process of re-thinking academic education, it may be time to soften the distinction between the arts and science. A well rounded education must involve both traditional arts skills and traditional scientific skills. The time may have come for our colleges and universities to re-think the use of the distinction between a BA and BS.
At the same time, colleges and universities need to continue to expand education about critical thinking to equip students with the skills necessary to detect and counter misinformation and misrepresentation of the facts. The mere possession of a few facts does not make a person educated. Knowing what to do with facts and evidence is critical. So far the Internet has not proven to be a good source of learning about critical thinking.
The protests on college campuses over the war in Gaza present an opportunity to look closely at the shape of academic education and to make necessary changes. I hope that administrators and professors don’t miss this opportunity to think holistically about education and begin to make some of the changes needed.
