Our Need for Intersectional Knowledge

By Angela Zhang

Columnist

Recently, Science Instructor Tatiana Waterman assigned “Ironland,” a short story called by Alan Lightman, to my physics class. She remarked that we would all be better if we would embrace both humanities and STEM. I must admit that I found the assignment quite enlightening, and I would recommend it to anyone looking for a quick read during this quarantine. 

Lightman, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has been lauded for beautifully intertwining different aspects of humanities and STEM into cohesive, unified narratives. For example, “Ironland” hones in on parallels between magnetism and the social hierarchies of today’s society. 

Around the same time, my English Instructor, Ellee Dean, asked my class to read a letter from George Saunders. In this letter, Saunders urges students to embrace writing, especially during the coronavirus pandemic. He claims that we are primary sources—the generation responsible for creating and sharing stories about the pandemic we are experiencing right now. If we don’t write, people will either forget or disbelieve.

These two assignments forced me to reconsider my conceptualization of humanities and STEM. I used to think that the two fields were exclusive, that you had to choose one or the other.  I was torn between the two, finding that I did not precisely fall into either of these rigid camps. 

After coming to Exeter, however, this narrow conception of two fields began to deteriorate. These two assignments have reinforced my belief that we need not choose between them.

Too often do I hear the phrases, “I’m more of a humanities guy” or “I’m a STEM person—I don’t really ‘do’ humanities.” Sometimes, I hear debates about which field is better. These debates are all based on a misconception that STEM could be possible without the humanities or that humanities could be possible without STEM. 

Though we often categorize ourselves into disciples of one or the other, it’s time to reconsider. Harboring an inclination towards one doesn’t mean we should totally abandon the important skill set of the other. In fact, we all should make a conscious effort to study both. 

Students need not make a choice, because there is no conflict. It is imperative for us to consider the ways we can bring these two fields together to reap the greatest benefits. It’s not either/or, it’s together/with, and we should rid the dichotomy between the two disciplines. The study of both humanities and STEM is critical to the preservation and advancement of the human race.

George Saunders is right: we do need writers and journalists and humanitarians to record the happenings of coronavirus to remember this major pandemic in history. We need films and documentaries and art to share and portray stories, music and media to capture and convey emotions, snapshots to not lose these moments in history. 

Obviously, we also need doctors and engineers to study optimal vaccines, researchers to evaluate the origins of this coronavirus outbreak and data scientists to create scientific models. We need everyone in both the humanities and STEM fields right now. We will all be better if we embrace both fields. 

The natural sciences tell us the “how” and “what” of the world, while social sciences provide insight into the “why.” More importantly, the integration of the two disciplines can help answer, or at least raise, the compelling questions of human existence— hy does any of this matter? What does true education mean? 

I think we’re finding part of the answer in this crisis: that each field needs the other.

In order for the sciences to fulfill their exigent mission to better the human race, they must have guidance from humanistic foundations, or they run the risk of being ethically deficient. Simultaneously, those pursuing traditional liberal arts must have firm understandings of science and technology to provide the best guidance possible. 

In short, we need engineers and innovators who are deeply compassionate and display that thorough comprehension of morals and justice. On the other end, we need lawyers, journalists and historians who are capable of sophisticated data analysis and understanding of scientific breakthroughs. The humanities have ever more to give to the sciences, and vice versa. 

It puts me at ease to know I don’t need to choose between either field. I can pursue both: they provide purpose to one another. 

This, however, was not an easy idea to accept. It took me quite long to do so, and I’m still solidifying this conclusion for myself. After all, the division between the fields seems prominent and unyielding in our educational culture. I understand if you find yourself in a similar position.  

But after reading first-person accounts from people in each field, I’ve realized that success comes from the study of both humanities and STEM. Though they might be more involved in one field than the other, these individuals did not need to choose between humanities and STEM: it was the integration of both fields that gave them purpose. 

Know that—in whatever you pursue, whether it be in STEM or the humanities—intersectional knowledge is incredibly important. It’s what the world needs, now more than ever.