"Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration; the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present; the words which express what they understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle, and feel not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world." Shelley
Can say the exact same thing about mathematics, and it has a stronger record of living up to those claims. Forms of calculus have existed since the Greeks. And 2000 years later they cast a massive shadow on the world, especially since modern AI is built totally on top of derivatives. Confusing terms like sqrt(-15) were used before meaning was clear. And math is certainly unacknowledged by most since they don’t really know any.
Thanks for this. Those sad quotes from US politicians demonstrate a pragmatic, bottom-line, transactional thinking that university should be 'job training' rather than the building of an expanding, creative and critical intellect.
I agree and disagree with you at the same time. All my favorite subjects are in the humanities, so it's a bit weird for me to say this, but maybe we don't need that many humanities students. Many of the positions that are occupied by the humanities are specialist positions that are only able to thrive because there is a sturdy base to society that can support these specialists. We need welders (and tradesmen, in general) to work on the infrastructure that supports society. Maybe we need roads, plumbing, and buildings before we need poets. Just think Maslow's pyramid.
@@thomervin7450 That makes pragmatic sense on a broad, abstract level. Should we force people to stay at the bottom of Maslow's pyramid or discourage them from climbing up? Would it be OK if you were funneled into plumbing to support society? Will you make your son go to trade school to build infrastructure? Will you advise your sister or friend away from a philosophy degree because they're needed at the bottom of the pyramid?
@@aaron2709 the thing is that you can still have a fulfilling life as a laborer of some sort. The emphasis that the elite class has put on elite jobs has ment that many people pursue the prestige and promise of academic careers. We needn't get our life's fulfillment from our work and work extiguishes many passions nonetheless.
@@abiku2923 I never said you couldn't have a fulfilling life with a labor job but there is an arc through history of people moving towards literacy and intelligence, not away from it. Education does not 'extinguish' passions. Education inspires passion. No one is 'promised' a career at the completion of college. Learning about a subject does not guarantee a job in that subject. It's not so black & white... me do job training, me get job. This is unrealistic expectations and one of the reasons it's best not to think of higher education as 'job training.'
That comment from Shelley was fantastic! I don't really understand poetry (I'm a STEM guy) but when I watch your videos, I do see why this stuff is as important (if not, more important) than the sciences. Keep up the good work - I love it!
More important? I get that the humanities are important. But STEM is what drove us out of the caves and into the first world we live in. Without STEM there would be no civilisation for the humanities to operate within.
@@avi8or20 Without the drive to advance that defines the realm of ideas that is the humanities, we wouldn't have a civilisation or it wouldn't be worth having it. Remember, civilisation is not just technological advancement. A chimp can use tools but no other species can compose poetry.
@@AlexIncarnate911 The drive to advance is simply human curiosity. Again, I know they're important, but not more important than STEM. A chimp can use tools, but no other species can compose poetry. However, 200 years ago no species at all left earth's atmosphere.
@@avi8or20 They did though in the imagination and works of science fiction writers. My point is, these distinctions are epistemologically unnecessary because both stem and the humanities ultimately come from the same source, that is the human condition and ingenuity. Both are different sides of the same coin.
@@AlexIncarnate911 Trying to draw an equivalence between actually leaving the earth's atmosphere and doing so in imagination is ridiculous. What's next? Equating the curing of cancer to imagining the curing of cancer? And btw, the humanities does not have any kind of monopoly on imagination. One needs to imagine a world free of cancer, and have the tools to actually do so, in order to live in a world free of cancer. Waxing poetic about a world free of cancer is not necessary.
I quite love humanities, myself, but I despise it in a university setting. Although they market themselves as open-minded people who can discuss anything, it's usually the opposite that plays out.
The Australian government recently introduced a bill that increased subsidies for STEM subjects and reduced them for arts and humanities. Shame. At least we get subsidies though.
@@musaratjahan7954 No its not. Without humanities, we wouldn't have a functional society. Do you think modern day societal progress and critical thinking comes out of nowhere?
@@Theo-bk6qj Critical thinking doesn't come out of humanities, that is utter nonsense. Solving technically challenging problems, in STEM, is where critical thinking comes from. I keep noticing noticing humanities folks go on and on about "critical thinking" yet haven't provided a single example or evidence for it
@@raycom201 why do I need to? I'm not the one going "we think critically cuz I said so!! STEM are just greedy automatons that work for Lockheed Martin REEEE!!!!" My work alone is more than enough proof for it, if someone (humanities people) don't believe that I can think critically, that is fine, I feel no need to prove it. Those who brag about this are usually the least critically thinking people. Classic Dunning Kruger effect.
I would ask you why you do this. But if you were to reply with reasons, you would be engaging in philosophy. And I'd hate to ask you to engage in something you despise.
@@musaratjahan7954 can you justify your thinking for that response being nonsensical? you don't give any logical argument, and neither does the original commenter. if you were, you would be engaging in humanities as you are arguing to prove your point, using logos. you cant even justify your opinion, and mercilessly attack others out of insecurity. your comment goes to show how childish and stupid you are. ☺
@@musaratjahan7954 Your answer is the nonsensical one here. They are right, every argumentation is essentially rooted in philosophy. The question about what is useful and what is not? Philosophy as well!
@@justarandomgirlvx3578 You know I can do this too, right? The reason your brain can form these arguments and form logic is due to complex chemical processes and biology, which themselves abide by the laws of physics at the quantum level, said rules themselves being defined mathematically.
I'm addicted to philosophy youtube channels
"Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration; the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present; the words which express what they understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle, and feel not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world." Shelley
Can say the exact same thing about mathematics, and it has a stronger record of living up to those claims. Forms of calculus have existed since the Greeks. And 2000 years later they cast a massive shadow on the world, especially since modern AI is built totally on top of derivatives. Confusing terms like sqrt(-15) were used before meaning was clear. And math is certainly unacknowledged by most since they don’t really know any.
Thanks for this. Those sad quotes from US politicians demonstrate a pragmatic, bottom-line, transactional thinking that university should be 'job training' rather than the building of an expanding, creative and critical intellect.
I agree and disagree with you at the same time. All my favorite subjects are in the humanities, so it's a bit weird for me to say this, but maybe we don't need that many humanities students. Many of the positions that are occupied by the humanities are specialist positions that are only able to thrive because there is a sturdy base to society that can support these specialists. We need welders (and tradesmen, in general) to work on the infrastructure that supports society. Maybe we need roads, plumbing, and buildings before we need poets. Just think Maslow's pyramid.
@@thomervin7450 That makes pragmatic sense on a broad, abstract level. Should we force people to stay at the bottom of Maslow's pyramid or discourage them from climbing up? Would it be OK if you were funneled into plumbing to support society? Will you make your son go to trade school to build infrastructure? Will you advise your sister or friend away from a philosophy degree because they're needed at the bottom of the pyramid?
@@aaron2709 the thing is that you can still have a fulfilling life as a laborer of some sort.
The emphasis that the elite class has put on elite jobs has ment that many people pursue the prestige and promise of academic careers. We needn't get our life's fulfillment from our work and work extiguishes many passions nonetheless.
@@abiku2923 I never said you couldn't have a fulfilling life with a labor job but there is an arc through history of people moving towards literacy and intelligence, not away from it. Education does not 'extinguish' passions. Education inspires passion.
No one is 'promised' a career at the completion of college. Learning about a subject does not guarantee a job in that subject. It's not so black & white... me do job training, me get job. This is unrealistic expectations and one of the reasons it's best not to think of higher education as 'job training.'
That comment from Shelley was fantastic! I don't really understand poetry (I'm a STEM guy) but when I watch your videos, I do see why this stuff is as important (if not, more important) than the sciences.
Keep up the good work - I love it!
More important? I get that the humanities are important. But STEM is what drove us out of the caves and into the first world we live in. Without STEM there would be no civilisation for the humanities to operate within.
@@avi8or20 Without the drive to advance that defines the realm of ideas that is the humanities, we wouldn't have a civilisation or it wouldn't be worth having it. Remember, civilisation is not just technological advancement. A chimp can use tools but no other species can compose poetry.
@@AlexIncarnate911 The drive to advance is simply human curiosity. Again, I know they're important, but not more important than STEM. A chimp can use tools, but no other species can compose poetry. However, 200 years ago no species at all left earth's atmosphere.
@@avi8or20 They did though in the imagination and works of science fiction writers. My point is, these distinctions are epistemologically unnecessary because both stem and the humanities ultimately come from the same source, that is the human condition and ingenuity. Both are different sides of the same coin.
@@AlexIncarnate911 Trying to draw an equivalence between actually leaving the earth's atmosphere and doing so in imagination is ridiculous. What's next? Equating the curing of cancer to imagining the curing of cancer? And btw, the humanities does not have any kind of monopoly on imagination. One needs to imagine a world free of cancer, and have the tools to actually do so, in order to live in a world free of cancer. Waxing poetic about a world free of cancer is not necessary.
I love humanities and history and science. Great video
yeah it was good you definitely have one of the most exciting channels on youtube!
I quite love humanities, myself, but I despise it in a university setting. Although they market themselves as open-minded people who can discuss anything, it's usually the opposite that plays out.
1:27 they are different spheres of influence
Awesome video! Agreed 100%
Brilliant
The Australian government recently introduced a bill that increased subsidies for STEM subjects and reduced them for arts and humanities. Shame. At least we get subsidies though.
That's how it should be
@@musaratjahan7954 No its not. Without humanities, we wouldn't have a functional society. Do you think modern day societal progress and critical thinking comes out of nowhere?
@@Theo-bk6qj Critical thinking doesn't come out of humanities, that is utter nonsense. Solving technically challenging problems, in STEM, is where critical thinking comes from. I keep noticing noticing humanities folks go on and on about "critical thinking" yet haven't provided a single example or evidence for it
@@musaratjahan7954 Have you?
@@raycom201 why do I need to? I'm not the one going "we think critically cuz I said so!! STEM are just greedy automatons that work for Lockheed Martin REEEE!!!!" My work alone is more than enough proof for it, if someone (humanities people) don't believe that I can think critically, that is fine, I feel no need to prove it. Those who brag about this are usually the least critically thinking people. Classic Dunning Kruger effect.
Yuval Harari? Really?
What is that ending music for each video
Good job!
Thank you!
i dont appreciate the abrupt transition to the outro that ruins the whole sentiment developed throughout the video. wtf man
beautifull
I'm so sick of social engineering that sucks out our souls.
0:27 SUS
The problem is with the system of higher education today. Not the humanities.
🤘🤘🤘🤘👍👍👍
You can take medications for that addiction.
I despise the humanities and throw out the resumes of anyone who takes more than the required minimum of them.
I would ask you why you do this. But if you were to reply with reasons, you would be engaging in philosophy. And I'd hate to ask you to engage in something you despise.
@@johnnydrydenjr only a humanities student could come up with a response that nonsensical
@@musaratjahan7954 can you justify your thinking for that response being nonsensical? you don't give any logical argument, and neither does the original commenter. if you were, you would be engaging in humanities as you are arguing to prove your point, using logos. you cant even justify your opinion, and mercilessly attack others out of insecurity. your comment goes to show how childish and stupid you are. ☺
@@musaratjahan7954 Your answer is the nonsensical one here. They are right, every argumentation is essentially rooted in philosophy. The question about what is useful and what is not? Philosophy as well!
@@justarandomgirlvx3578 You know I can do this too, right? The reason your brain can form these arguments and form logic is due to complex chemical processes and biology, which themselves abide by the laws of physics at the quantum level, said rules themselves being defined mathematically.