Sincere question: Is it easier to acquire interdisciplinary knowledge in the sciences or the humanities? (thread)
I'd say it's easier in the sciences, but I'm open to counterargument. The main reason is the universality of math. Math is the language of science and if you 1/
I'd say it's easier in the sciences, but I'm open to counterargument. The main reason is the universality of math. Math is the language of science and if you 1/
have a good grounding in math, it's amazing how quickly you can pick up other disciplines. For example, problems in engineering or economics or biology look indecipherable at first, but then I'll say "Oh, that's just a Fourier transform" or "I get it: a boundary-value problem" 2/
You can derive a lot from first principles in the sciences, provided you understand the math. The humanities are different because they're so contingent. Knowing 13th-century Spanish history provides me with virtually no knowledge of 2nd-century Chinese history, let alone 3/
insight into the writings of Foucault or the plays of Aristophanes. There's no shortcut. You simply have to read tens of thousands of pages of primary sources in a your field of interest. So interdisciplinary knowledge seems necessarily more time-consuming. 4/
Obviously, this isn't remotely intended as a criticism of the humanities or an exaltation of science. It's just an observation. 5/5
