I love this article. Maybe it’s because I’m not a quantitative person, but it makes the case for the humanities, the soft majors, which are slipping in interest during this economy. It also highlights that while being a deft accountant might get you far, the ability to effectively communicate your findings to the CEO will get you farther.
I think the general feeling is that when push comes to shove, the hard disciplines will and should win out. We often hear politicians talk about the need for our country to be producing more engineers and scientists to ensure our competitiveness. Rarely do we ever hear anyone argue for the critical role of sculptors, philosophers, or Victorian lit experts.
So, is what David Brooks argues here idealistic? Can we really make the case that we should be taking a class on Ulysses over Accountancy 101 or Calc? What evidence do we have that when the going gets tough, the tough need Kant?
Posts
Thanks for providing such a thoughtful views.I agree on your statement that deft accountant might get you far, the ability to effectively communicate your findings to the CEO will get you farther.Very well said.
ReplyDeletee signatures