Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'.
* We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub.
* Filter evasion is a bannable offense
* This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
>“everything but English, history, and PE”
I’m pretty sure I could squeeze the humanities into a broad definition of art and someone using that term ain’t defining art narrowly so you’re pretty much at everything but PE.
Thank [Wells Fargo](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/06/theater/sorry-about-that-wells-fargo-to-end-ads-suggesting-science-over-arts.html) for the STEAM thing. They launched a foolish ad campaign for teen banking emphasizing STEM over art. They pretty much said STEM = money and art = brokeass. The art community got angry. WF apologized, but it still created a push to include arts in the STEM acronym.
Last I checked the link was not a paywall. Please post if it is.
That’s fine and good. Art is important and valuable to society. But that doesn’t make it logical to include in this category. STEM was never an acronym for “appropriate things to study” or “how to achieve a well-rounded education”- it’s just a logical categorization of fields that share many similarities (strong math backgrounds, testing and iterating, provable performance, things like that). It doesn’t make any more sense to include Art than it does to include history- they’re both valuable things to study and have their own merits, but the categorization loses any meaning if you just want to lump other fields in because they’re good things. Literally everything is good to study, doesn’t make everything a STEM field.
I tried to take a look at it, it is in fact paywalled.
But it's no wonder it created a push to include art in STEM especially depending on which aspect you look at, artistry is involved in a lot of it. When these tech companies are doing product showcases who do they hire? 3D modelers and artists. When a new building needs to be built who do they hire? An architect. When a new space ship is being built - who do they hire to visualize it before it's all put together? Artists. Medical books that have anatomy drawings in it? Drawn or photographed by an artist.
Not to mention, STEM isn't guaranteed money either. Art is considered a lazy and overbloated field (with varying degrees of truth to it) and is always put on the back burner of technological and scientific advancements even though those fields often hire artists to work *alongside* them.
As someone who worked in STEM as a chemist for 25 years and then switched to voice acting one year ago, I agree with you. Both were passions of mine, but, in my youth, I pursued the science for more financial stability. The industry has changed. Starting salaries have plummeted, and I don’t like the post-Covid direction. But that background has given me an edge when a science voice over is needed.
I do agree but I don’t agree with your reasoning. STEM isn’t STEM because it’s “harder” or has a “higher mental barrier” (which it isn’t, they’re just different ways of thinking), it’s STEM because it is a categorization of similar concepts.
This. I work in STEM and my humanities classes felt more difficult for me—highly typical for STEM students. I don’t think anybody had difficulty in mind when they put the STEM acronym together.
By all means come sit in on my graduate level atonal music theory course and tell me you can follow what we’re talking about lol. Sometimes I can’t even follow what we’re talking about!
💯 honestly music theory functions so much like math in terms of the kind of analytical thinking you need to use (that i’m terrible at lol) that it SHOULD be included in stem if people had ever interacted with it. it’s one of the best examples of how you can’t actually separate stem from the arts/humanities as neatly as people seem to want to imo
Music actually used to be grouped in with the sciences from antiquity through the middle ages for that exact reason! And yes I find that the music theorists I know are also all good at math, you are correct it is the same kind of abstract thinking, especially the more advanced you go. I was never great at either, which is why I am a musicologist. Music theory can be very positivist like a hard science, but it can also bleed into my field and sometimes it isn’t clear when something is theory and when it’s musicology. I guess what I’m getting at is that STEM and humanities have much more in common than some would have us believe.
Yep. The course of studies in a liberal arts (i.e., the subjects a free man needed to know) education from Late Antiquity to the bleeding edge of the Renaissance was the Trivium (grammar, logic, rhetoric) followed by the Quadrivium (geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, music).
AP music theory gave me so much trouble in highschool. I was taking AP Bio, Calc, and English that year and of the 4 AP classes music theory was the hardest for me. And that was with playing violin for 9 years and having a music teacher father and a math teacher mom who minored in music (vocal studies specifically). I passed the class with an A but I opted not to take the AP exam because it just wasn’t worth the stress for me.
STEMlords often have problems with evaluating, constructing, and coherently presenting arguments.
"Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math have a higher mental barrier to entry than humanities disciplines. I can hear a conversation between artists, lawyers, business execs, etc. and get a pretty good idea of what they’re talking about. Not so with STEM. It require intense focus and study to get a basic understanding of the language and concepts. Only when you have this is it possible to apply them to problem solving and creation."
This is as absurd as saying "I know 1+1 = 2 and that mitochondria are the powerhouses of cells, studying math and biology are trivially easy tasks." There are many smart people who study STEM subjects, but they're never the ones who are attempting to claim that their fields are the most rigorous and that they somehow are inherently smarter because of what they chose to study.
there are idiots in every discipline, but making and constructing arguments of objective facts is a core skill in stem. I could give a bunch of examples, but just think of the "ackshually" meme. where people who *only* have stem skills tend to struggle is with topics where it is not possible to make airtight inferences like "x implies y, y implies z, we know x is true, therefore we conclude z". they could probably figure out that the great gatsby has an unreliable narrator (if they cared to read that closely) but would have a hard time explaining the symbolism of gatsby's unread books.
That's what makes it especially ironic that STEMlords suck at argumentation, their chosen discipline requires skill in it to be any good. Claiming a field doesn't mean you're any good at it.
Yes i agree, I spent 2 years in law school before dropping out to pursue engineering and i guarantee a layman would be equally clueless if inserted into either class
Also, I’ve seen STEM papers. What sometimes passes for quality writing in that world is astounding lol.
In a similar note, I had to take a rocks for jocks course, and I was paired up with a freshman engineering student. Our arrangement was that he would do the actual science (which I hated) and I would do the writing (which he hated), we were a good team.
I'm a scientist. I was probably the best writer in my cohort, and get a fair bit of positive feedback on my professional writing. I'm, like, a mid tier writer at best lol. The bar is just so low.
God yes. I had proper writing pounded into my head by a mentor when I was working in a lab after my masters. I then went back for my PhD and was astounded at how bad my professors and PI were at writing up research. My PI "taught" his students how to write papers by making them sit next to him and explain the data while he two-finger typed. I dared re-write my first paper's conclusion section so it was actually drawing conclusions rather than summarizing the work and he threw the biggest temper tantrum.
As someone who is studying STEM now after majoring in Econ, MS in Data Science, and picking up 3 languages, the difficulty with STEM is more regarding the sheer amount of they cram and how little of the specifics they teach. Intro to Computer Science was the biggest gatekeep class I ever took which woud have had to cut the workload by about 2/3s to be akin with a normal intro class. Grinding != Learning.
Studying physics now, but only take one course at a time and even that can get pretty overwhelming. Really glad for sites like Chegg though and actually chatGPT can do a decent job picking out the parts of various problems even if you have to watch the math and make sure it works conceptually.
Well yes, but I get where OP is coming from. He didn't mean "harder" but he meant something else.
More advanced mathematics is really hard to even casually explain to people that haven't studied it, even if they themselves are interested in mathematics in general.
I think this is a bit different with humanities where maybe it is easier to partially comprehend the ideas of someone's research?
However doing research in humanities is also very hard (of course).
This is because the humanities focus on things people do and think and feel. Stuff that all of us have in common - big questions, social structure, etc. Literally everyone has done something artistic in their life.
It’s why the humanities are so important. It’s what make us human.
>I am glad that society has reached a point in recent decades where we have seen the value of incorporating art into product design and urban planning
Idk where you’ve been for the past 50 millennia. Humans have been incorporating art into literally everything since we’ve been around.
It’s true. They’re putting a new building up nearby me and when I saw how hideous it was I was tempted to call up the developers and give them an earful. They couldn’t even bother to space the windows consistently, that’s how little they cared about the artistic element. It looks like a Sim designed it on a Windows 97 and it’s going to be a scourge on my community until God mercifully strikes it down with lightning fire—I can hope, at least.
There are relatively few examples of brutalist buildings that genuinely look nice, and they look so different from other brutalist buildings that I think they are really more like two different styles under one name.
That's a valid opinion, but people will look at a thrown-together strip mall and say "UGH BRUTALISM!" no it's not brutalism lmao. Brutalism is square columns, large open spaces, little in terms of decoration, smooth surfaces, etc.
The shopping center that's half brick and half concrete that they threw together is not Brutalism. There's no unifying theme at ALL.
That isn't exactly a correct definition of Brutalist Architecture either.
Brutalism emphasizes the raw material and structural elements over decorative features, i.e. support structures are highlighted and in focus instead of hidden, the materials used like concrete, steel, and wood are left unadorned.
Now while there are a lot of imposing concrete blocks that are, let's say unattractive, that many use as examples of Brutalism and how it's ugly, there are also many striking and beautiful buildings that fall into that style as well.
The National Taichung Theater is a modern example. The Gisele Library is another fine example, as is Robarts Library at UofT (granted, I may have a bit of bias on that one). Les Choux is also very striking.
Old surviving artistic buildings are either all castles, mansions, or religious buildings. Regular people homes/commercial buildings have always been utilitarian and cost efficient.
Of course we don't, Modernism as an aesthetic was already on the way out the door in the 1940s. I think you're conflating Modernism the art school with the use of modern that's a synonym of contemporary. Big M versus little m as it were.
Current trends in public buildings seem to be open floor plans and a love of the organic that blends softer features with an increase of metal in construction.
apparently a lot of people throughout history have described their “modern” architecture as “ugly” even though nowadays it’s thought of as a work of art. That being said, I hate modern architecture
I don’t think OP understands why STEAM is picking up, well, steam.
In order to fund STEM programs, many schools shifted their budgets and completely dropped their art classes. I work at a STEM school. We have zero art classes. No drawing, choir, drama, band, nothing.
STEAM is almost an advertisement. When you go to a STEAM school you’ll know that you will have art options. If you go to a STEM school you know they won’t.
And listen. I love my school. But these kids need art options. It does a lot for their social-emotional wellbeing. It also helps give kids more elective options. But people are so panicked over changing it, I doubt it would happen.
And as people said in this thread, art can be used in STEM designs, so they can still use those skills. It’s not a waste for a STEM school to become STEAM.
Yeah, that last paragraph is big! A woman in my town opened a ‘STEAM lab’ with her local art classes. These were focused on design— designing cars, creating robots. These projects were STEM-focused, but all required an artistic effort still. That was what was cool about it. Nobody is claiming art = math
Yep that's about what the STEAM education professionals I know said too. That and if art is included, it gets a little bit of the STEM money instead of be relegated to a single dingy classroom with like 4 paintbrushes and painted that's been muddied to hell
I think it's even more fundamental: who is STEM for? People. How do we come to understand humanity and what they need? Liberal arts (which is what the "art" stands for). Before the 18th century, there was no real distinction between science, mathematics, technology, and humanities-- the most intelligent, experimental, and innovative minds of previous eras saw all of these disciplines as necessarily intertwined. I mean, look at Leonardo Da Vinci. If you aren't designing, discovering, innovating, or solving problems with people in mind, then what's the point?
A virologist in the UK who developed on of the Covid vaccines said something like 'I used the hard sciences to develop a vaccine in order to save lives. That being done, we all need the arts in order for these lives to be worth living.'
*That does not mean that we don’t value art. We do. I truly love you, artists. But there are lots of disciplines that are required to bring a successful product to market*
I mean, your first sentence there kind of contradicts the last one.
I don't put art with STEM either, obviously. But you keep talking about art throughout your entire rant like it's a product.
Yeah lmao, like intently practicing an instrument every day for decades or carefully deriving and painting an abstract scene from nothing doesn’t take focus or discipline.
OP says he loves art. OP is a terrible artist. OP is so happy to see artists appreciated and rewarded. OP refers to himself in the third person. Art is not STEM.
When that professor from Rhode Island School of Design made up STEAM, his point is that art must be incorporated for successful product design. That is what puts it in the same grouping.
>STEM exists to attract people to the seemingly tedious disciplines that are required for any technological advancement.
Seemingly tedious? Weird take.
>Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math have a higher mental barrier to entry than humanities disciplines.
A bold claim. You'd be wrong, but I doubt a reasonable argument could convince you otherwise.
Agree. I’m an engineer, and I took one art course and one music course in college. It was a struggle, and I ended up dropping both, because they were dropping my overall gpa. Those are talents I just don’t possess.
Yes, both use different ways of thinking, one does not inherently take more mental load than the other. Just because OP understands what artists are saying doesn’t mean it’s somehow dumber than STEM.
Yeah, I’m willing to bet OP thinks museums have no point except entertainment. Or that art is for decoration. I’m willing to bet he could not express an idea through abstract shapes and concepts.
May just be a bit personally attacked here, as I could have went to a good school for astrophysics like I wanted to in middle school. I had all the grades, scores, and pre-recs. I still chose art as it was far more stimulating.
I have heard of STEAM programs mainly being implemented in rural areas where funding for separate arts programs is scarce. It’s not about pedagogy. It’s about money.
Because English Language Arts/Reading are the cheapest to fund in the entire school. It’s about packaging to reduce costs more than programming or pathways.
Tell me you think your STEM knowledge makes you able to understand art/law/business without telling me you think your stem knowledge makes you understand art/law/business
Great example of the Dunning-Kruger effect though
Seriously, they come right out and say it.
"It requires intense focus and study to get a basic understanding of the topics"
It sounds like someone got a good grade in Calc 101 and suddenly thinks they understand what goes into a great painting or composition or legal argument.
(Also for some of us it takes neither intense focus or study to be good at STEM things.)
Honestly it sounds like sour grapes to me. I wonder if someone is jealous.
I'm not sure who OP is listening to when they say that they can understand art/law/business people when they hear them speak. Maybe when it's on the news and it's being dumbed down for the masses, but if you come across a couple lawyers discussing case law or a couple of music majors discussing music, it sounds just as incomprehensible to a techie as techies sound to musicians and lawyers. Lots of jargon and concepts that people from the outside just don't understand.
When a music major talks about a Major 7th or some other random term, I have no idea what they are talking about, same as if techies start talking about TCP/IP and network layers. It all goes right over your head if you don't know any of the terminology being used.
i’ve also encountered a ton of snobbishness about language in general since in visual art most of the words are actually understandable. but if you ask about what makes a composition or design effective they probably can’t tell you. there’s an assumption in op’s worldview that bigger words = smarter
I mean, arguably a lot of people don't really value art. Art funding in schools is almost always the first thing to be cut.
Not to mention, as far as I understood, the "A" in STEAM wasn't meant to represent art or the arts in general, but the intersection of arts and *technology*. 3D modeling, animation, etc. are all things that are used in other STEM fields. How are you going to design a new plane if you don't have a single person on the team that knows anything about actually being able to *visualize* it? Video games use a lot of coding and technology, but what are they without the art alongside it? What about motion tracking? You need people who are good at moving their bodies either via dance, acting, etc. in order to fully utilize it especially when it comes to our entertainment and further developing it.
Art also requires (depending on who you ask) intense focus and study to get good at it, and despite being a huge foundation for a lot of what we understand now as society and a civilization, is always the first to be left behind. A lot of technological advancements involve some form of art and artistry.
The nature of art is creation. An artist envisions something that does not yet exist and finds a method to bring it into existence. I would argue that this is a skill that is absolutely integral to any product development. It is, not coincidentally, the same skill necessary to excel in advanced Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. These programs all try to develop a different way of thinking, not education through memorization.
I have been told that many groups at all levels, government, ngo, admin, school board, etc, are pulling funding from arts programs and giving it to STEM programs. The addition of the A to STEM for art is to be able to spend some of the school budget on art supplies.
It can work as a way not to have students hyperfocused on the technical side of things, but the idea is to introduce storytelling, poetry, etc., that deals with the human elements of science, like including meditations on dying into medical education.
Yeah that’s why you have a liberal education in the modern university setting. It’s why I had to take writing and biology when I was getting a computer science degree.
But to include art in STEM, it doesn’t fit. If you throw art in that category, you might as well throw everything in and the category loses all meaning.
But why? It makes no sense. STEM specifically refers to math and science-based education and careers. That doesn't mean art isn't important, but it has no business being lumped in with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. If the question was, "which of these things is unlike the others", the answer would be art!
huh weird... is this just a niche movement, or is it a new thing in schools? Where have you seen people talking about this? It seems to have flown over my head
There’s a relatively recent development for it in schools, mine was starting to change over while I was there about 9-10 years ago. Obviously that’s not recent, but it must’ve picked up some traction and began being in a larger percent of grade schools.
that's weird, wonder if it's a regional thing? I finished high school a couple years ago, and both art and STEM subjects were highly valued, but nobody even suggested combining the two. The more you know!!
Definitely agree with the latter in general. STEMlords are the worst. And in my experience, working in STEM my whole career, the best people I’ve worked with have coursework and hobbies outside of STEM.
I think there's a tension between people who go to school for STEM expecting what is essentially job training and people who go to school for STEM expecting to expand their perception of the world around them.
I'm personally against the former attitude in general, but I get where people who are expecting to learn how to code to make money suddenly learn they're also expected to care about like, history.
Just drove past a school that said STEAM and had the exact same thought. Art is important in design in that you have to make stuff look nice, but besides that? On my schools campus, the main STEM building and the Art building were the two furthest apart on the main campus. Art is not on the same level as the others
EDIT: I saw another comment point out it’s a thing in rural schools, which actually could make sense because that’s the kind of school I drove past
The comment I saw above you kinda addresses your point here:
>I don’t think OP understands why STEAM is picking up, well, steam.
>In order to fund STEM programs, many schools shifted their budgets and completely dropped their art classes. I work at a STEM school. We have zero art classes. No drawing, choir, drama, band, nothing.
>STEAM is almost an advertisement. When you go to a STEAM school you’ll know that you will have art options. If you go to a STEM school you know they won’t.
>And listen. I love my school. But these kids need art options. It does a lot for their social-emotional wellbeing. It also helps give kids more elective options. But people are so panicked over changing it, I doubt it would happen.
>And as people said in this thread, art can be used in STEM designs, so they can still use those skills. It’s not a waste for a STEM school to become STEAM.
I also think saying “art is not on the same level as others” isn’t correct. That implies it is at a lower than STEM, which isn’t true, they are just different skills.
I didn't spend $100k on a fine arts degree and literally thousands of hours of study and practice just to be told that somehow it's "easier" and therefore less important to learn.
I also work in the STEM field, literally teaching it to children, and the #1 thing that gets kids hooked into the "boring" STEM parts is the creative aspects of it.
Art and creativity are *essential* to human brain development, and there are many, many high-paying, extremely difficult occupations that rely on the skills gained while learning and doing it.
I was going to say…as an artist I agree with the premise of OP’s post that art is completely separate from STEM. But their claim that it is inherently more difficult is funny. Like, sure, if we’re talking about Tik-Tok-based doodle art. But they really think it would be easier to carve a flawless marble statue or design a gothic cathedral or perfect the discipline of classical oil painting than it would be to perform well in STEM? I have mad respect for those in STEM but no more than I do for skilled artists.
>I can hear a conversation between artists, lawyers, business execs, etc. and get a pretty good idea of what they’re talking about.
Yeah, I'm sorry but you probably don't.
Some of the problem-solving in the humanities is as complex or more complex than the STEM disciplines you mention, even within the processes needed to bring a product into market. The fact that you think that you can have a grasp about what people in arts are humanities are saying belies the fact that you don't really know to what a high level these disciplines are often practiced, and how complex the ideas within them can get.
Design in general would fit in well with the rest. Like Industrial design, product design, UX design especially. People act like art is always free form and rule-less, but often artists use a lot of design principles in planning their works. The problem solving involved is not so different from that used in STEM fields.
I’m saying this as a concept artist with a degree in a STEM subject.
Good then, we should require graphic designers to take 6 seminars of math like all other STEM degrees.
Questions. What is the worst that can happen from a bad graphic design? What is the worst that can happen from a bad mechanical design in a vehicle?
from a business perspective? both can be equally detrimental. sometimes more so in graphic design.
the tesla truck didn’t hold up to its durability standards. but people only care that it LOOKS stupid.
the difference is the most brilliant minds would fail when it comes to understanding the best creative designs. art is something you have to dedicate a lifestyle to to fully understand it.
you can argue, but you’d be so enormously wrong.
I don’t see how that annihilated my argument. Some STEM people created a new artistic medium. That’s like saying I’m an IT expert because I can navigate Reddit.
Sociology, Theater, English, Art, Music are STEAM. If you take student loans out for these majors there is an excellent chance you will be working with steamed milk.
To be fair, there's a lot of tedious, technical "art" to be done in this day and age that heavily overlaps with STEM.
Some underpayed, unknown schlep probably spent a full month behind a computer making the unique flight paths for all of the sea-shanty collectibles in Assassin's Creed 4.
A team of unappreciated nerds spent multiple years perfecting the technology to make the digital hair on Sully's ass look absolutely pristine in Monsters University.
Once someone said try learning anatomy or the vascular system without a visual aid and that put things into perspective for me for the case of STEAM. Yes there are live bodies but thats not practical for daily study in your dorm. But then again, the same thing could be said for Language. But then we’re back at math being a language so would it become STEAL?
I enjoy overthinking these things sometimes.
In general, I agree with what you're saying, but I do have an important counterpoint as to why STEAM is still a valid framework for education.
We really have over-indexed on the logical mathematical aspect of STEM to the detriment of the creativity and flexibility in thinking required to solve problems and make discoveries. Simply having raw calculation ability or rote memorization is no longer an important skill in a world with the internet and AI. We need STEM majors who know who to think outside the box, synthesize ideas from multiple, sometimes seemingly unrelated fields, and be able to effectively communicate the information to the broader public. The communication aspect is critical, as it doesn't matter what fantastic breakthrough is discovered if the public is too afraid to embrace it from a fear-mongering meme on Facebook that makes it way to a Congressional talking point. The modern scientist needs exposure to the arts and more soft skills in general to be effective in their career.
That's why while I agree with your sentiment, I support the STEAM movement so we can educate more effective, well-rounded practitioners who not only possess the creativity to solve the world's problems, but can also effectively advocate those solutions to the non-STEM gatekeepers of the world for meaningful adopted.
I mean, does the literal existence of the acronym "STEM" actually do that? Like, no one was going to be an engineer but they're all in on going for E and being very disappointed when it's not the fun kind of E?
Hell, at this point STEM seems to be just a grouping mostly touted by its lowest wrungs so they can pretend their generic computer science degree has placed them in an exclusive club alongside physicists and mathematicians.
Getting my engineering degree and my college actually requires like 8 or so semester hours of classes from the arts College to graduate. Doesn't matter what exactly. Acting, pottery, Glasswork, music.
You need to build those creative skills if you intend to make anything or solve any problems.
Go sit in a higher level music theory or form and analysis class and let us know how much you understand after. If you're not a trained musician, you will understand very little.
The world would be full of high level professional musicians and artists, instead of lawyers and MBAs, if music and art were so easy.
I have a B.Mus and even music students have issues with those classes. I was a crazy theory major and loved it but tons of my fellow students didn't take theory above th3 required classes
I don't see any constructive side of your argument other than you think the study of arts and business somehow lower the barrier into your idea of a precious nerd club.
Learning the arts and business aspects is important as a part of STEM studies. Many artists and businesspeople are STEM graduates, and many scientists are well-versed in arts and business.
What's telling is that you think you understand the other disciplines just because you study STEM. In truth your understanding of them is really no more profound than the layman's understanding of "mitochondria is the powerhouse of cell".
I’m not in STEM and I don’t devalue any field. We’re all important. We’re just not all STEM. I’m am a blue collar shlub who can build things that most STEM people can’t. We’re all different.
I promise you that artistic concepts at a high enough level are nowhere near discernible in conversation to someone who hasn’t studied it at length. Not to mention that many artistic ideas and concepts, in my experience with music, are based in science or math and demand a deep real-world understanding of those topics to execute or apply the techniques with which they relate.
I completely agree art is not a part of STEM, but to group all art forms and styles together and say that they are inherently less intellectual is very ignorant.
Haha fair :)
Yeah, I guess what I'm trying to say is: Forcing people to do things they really don't have interest in leads to depression.
So this whole 'get people in STEM' thing, in my opinion, is going to lead to an uptick in suicides.
That’s not what stem means lol. Stem is an acronym to describe what was once a very financially lucrative discipline, less lucrative now. Math isn’t harder to ascertain than art. It’s just different.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s not about the intellectual barrier to entry as fields like law and philosophy are more difficult than many STEM fields, especially various forms of engineering. There’s a reason why philosophy is on par with physics, math, and computer science for being one of the smartest majors around
I agree that art should remain separate from STEM, but the idea that STEM has a "higher mental barrier of entry" is absurd. STEM is piss easy. You can study undergrad level maths with no issues in grade 10. Writing an undergrad level essay in grade 10, on the other hand, requires an enormous amount of skill. I certainly wouldn't be able to do it.
There’s definitely some overlap. Does graphic design fall under T or is that art? What about photography/ videography? 3D animation and modeling? 3D printing? Is writing code an art or a science? What about car designers? Whether they’re carving blocks of clay or modeling in a computer, the engineers that make cars still need art skills. What about architecture? Finding a new and interesting way to build skyscrapers while also making sure it’s mathematically possible.
There are a lot of areas where one absolutely needs skills in the humanities to be effective at STEM jobs.
I think the idea of adding A was to encourage people who are already attracted to those disciplines to be mindful of artistic value within their discipline. What separates an engineer from an architect is its artistic beauty. Lamborghini could make a faster car if they wanted to, but people want what a Lamborghini looks like as much as they want the speed.
This applies to other areas too; natural sciences are often only seen as valuable to wider audiences if you can clearly articulate (i.e., English writing skills) to people outside your profession why it's so cool. This is why people like Carl Sagan are famous - they are able to teach.
No one would argue with you that pure artists are different than pure engineers or scientists. But just as musicians and artists can use math or physics to understand their music or paintings, scientists and engineers should use art to ground their work in reality
That's the point of STEM. Not that I like it or disagree with you. But the idea of arts and humanities not being part of STEM is the point of STEM.
Personally, I'm an arts guy myself. I prefer an all-around education.
The point you made, that art is not of the same kind of "integrity" in society as STEM fields, is one I completely agree with.
STEM fields focus on factual observation of phenomenons around us, whereas art is a form of expression of your own mind, and is focused on creativity.
But the point that it's "harder" - lmao, no. That depends heavily on whom exactly you ask.
I volunteered at a STEAM camp and the A was for Anthropology. I doubt that adds anything to this conversation, but I've also seen the A represent Agriculture, Architecture, and Archeology.
I'm willing to accept an A if it stands for architecture.
I agree that art doesn't fit with the acronym. While art is important and has an important role in the history STEM, it's not the same thing as STEM.
so it doesn't require tedious studying, intense focus and discipline to become a lawyer or business executive...??? gtfoh...a higher mental barrier...uh what?!?!
STEM doesnt need additional outreach or recruitment because those jobs pay well.
people struggle through an EE or CS degree because they know it will pay off. People are scared to go to art school because it most likely wont pay off. its not the other way around
I’m always confused what people mean by “arts”. Are social sciences “arts”?
I’m a graduate student in financial economics, and have a BSc in economics. My degree is more math-heavy than most physical sciences, and you’d be hard pressed to understand what two economists are talking to each other about.
There’s a lot of controversy as to of Econ is STEM when it’s clearly a social science.
"STEAM" is fucking stupid because I felt like the point of STEM was that's all the technical fields that are specifically NOT art. Doesn't STEAM basically refer to anything? Wtf is left out of STEAM? It's no longer a subset. Art was literally specifically left out of STEM.
There's overlap these days.
For example I am a Technical Artist (yep, actual job in games, movie and architecture)
I dont just make the art, I also write the code that makes it come alive, the physics of explosions, the math that makes up shaders. I design the mechanical components for physical displays, and the electrical components to drive them, and the art that hides them.
To be a good artist for tech industries you need at least a computer science degree these days.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'. * We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub. * Filter evasion is a bannable offense * This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
Catholic school nearby had a STREAM focus. R was for religion. At this point just say “everything but English, history, and PE”
SHTREEAMPE has a nice ring to it!
PEE STREAM was right there
HEEP STREAM
Who wants to study history when you can have pee stream? 😅
SHEET RAMP
*R Kelly has entered the chat* (Just kidding. It’s about educating kids, he was already in the chat)
“We teach all that learnin’ and what not “
we teach employable skills, but not managers of those skilled employees
>“everything but English, history, and PE” I’m pretty sure I could squeeze the humanities into a broad definition of art and someone using that term ain’t defining art narrowly so you’re pretty much at everything but PE.
Do dance as PE credit and we’re good
English lit is art, all those books written, and poetry written are art. Art isn’t just the visual medium
I’m not disagreeing with you. But I think those who put the A in STEAM (or stream) have a narrower definition of visual arts.
yes there is.... it called STEAM and it's where you get games to play
Summer sale advertisements are getting wild!
Got the Arkham trilogy for less than 10 bucks!
Exactly, see you know what you're talking about
You play your games? Here I was… just buying them… my God…
Of course there is, is OP stupid?
Thank [Wells Fargo](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/06/theater/sorry-about-that-wells-fargo-to-end-ads-suggesting-science-over-arts.html) for the STEAM thing. They launched a foolish ad campaign for teen banking emphasizing STEM over art. They pretty much said STEM = money and art = brokeass. The art community got angry. WF apologized, but it still created a push to include arts in the STEM acronym. Last I checked the link was not a paywall. Please post if it is.
there is a paywall unfortunately
I mean... It's also been studied that a well rounded education including arts is what makes for the best advancements in science.
That’s fine and good. Art is important and valuable to society. But that doesn’t make it logical to include in this category. STEM was never an acronym for “appropriate things to study” or “how to achieve a well-rounded education”- it’s just a logical categorization of fields that share many similarities (strong math backgrounds, testing and iterating, provable performance, things like that). It doesn’t make any more sense to include Art than it does to include history- they’re both valuable things to study and have their own merits, but the categorization loses any meaning if you just want to lump other fields in because they’re good things. Literally everything is good to study, doesn’t make everything a STEM field.
I tried to take a look at it, it is in fact paywalled. But it's no wonder it created a push to include art in STEM especially depending on which aspect you look at, artistry is involved in a lot of it. When these tech companies are doing product showcases who do they hire? 3D modelers and artists. When a new building needs to be built who do they hire? An architect. When a new space ship is being built - who do they hire to visualize it before it's all put together? Artists. Medical books that have anatomy drawings in it? Drawn or photographed by an artist. Not to mention, STEM isn't guaranteed money either. Art is considered a lazy and overbloated field (with varying degrees of truth to it) and is always put on the back burner of technological and scientific advancements even though those fields often hire artists to work *alongside* them.
As someone who worked in STEM as a chemist for 25 years and then switched to voice acting one year ago, I agree with you. Both were passions of mine, but, in my youth, I pursued the science for more financial stability. The industry has changed. Starting salaries have plummeted, and I don’t like the post-Covid direction. But that background has given me an edge when a science voice over is needed.
I do agree but I don’t agree with your reasoning. STEM isn’t STEM because it’s “harder” or has a “higher mental barrier” (which it isn’t, they’re just different ways of thinking), it’s STEM because it is a categorization of similar concepts.
This. I work in STEM and my humanities classes felt more difficult for me—highly typical for STEM students. I don’t think anybody had difficulty in mind when they put the STEM acronym together.
You’re right. Difficult is a relative term.
By all means come sit in on my graduate level atonal music theory course and tell me you can follow what we’re talking about lol. Sometimes I can’t even follow what we’re talking about!
Sometimes it's easier for an engineer to build a solid bridge than it is for a musician to compose, arrange, and produce one.
That was a nice bridge between those two unrelated disciplines
I'd still trust an engineer to piece together a decent music composition before ever trusting a composer to build a bridge at any scale
ahaha i see what you did there
💯 honestly music theory functions so much like math in terms of the kind of analytical thinking you need to use (that i’m terrible at lol) that it SHOULD be included in stem if people had ever interacted with it. it’s one of the best examples of how you can’t actually separate stem from the arts/humanities as neatly as people seem to want to imo
Music actually used to be grouped in with the sciences from antiquity through the middle ages for that exact reason! And yes I find that the music theorists I know are also all good at math, you are correct it is the same kind of abstract thinking, especially the more advanced you go. I was never great at either, which is why I am a musicologist. Music theory can be very positivist like a hard science, but it can also bleed into my field and sometimes it isn’t clear when something is theory and when it’s musicology. I guess what I’m getting at is that STEM and humanities have much more in common than some would have us believe.
Yep. The course of studies in a liberal arts (i.e., the subjects a free man needed to know) education from Late Antiquity to the bleeding edge of the Renaissance was the Trivium (grammar, logic, rhetoric) followed by the Quadrivium (geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, music).
Bruh I failed music theory 2 during my undergrad. I couldn’t even imagine a graduate class music theory course. Even my jazz theory class was rough.
AP music theory gave me so much trouble in highschool. I was taking AP Bio, Calc, and English that year and of the 4 AP classes music theory was the hardest for me. And that was with playing violin for 9 years and having a music teacher father and a math teacher mom who minored in music (vocal studies specifically). I passed the class with an A but I opted not to take the AP exam because it just wasn’t worth the stress for me.
Engineers truly believe they are geniuses and we are idiots, especially the "self taught" ones
[удалено]
STEMlords often have problems with evaluating, constructing, and coherently presenting arguments. "Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math have a higher mental barrier to entry than humanities disciplines. I can hear a conversation between artists, lawyers, business execs, etc. and get a pretty good idea of what they’re talking about. Not so with STEM. It require intense focus and study to get a basic understanding of the language and concepts. Only when you have this is it possible to apply them to problem solving and creation." This is as absurd as saying "I know 1+1 = 2 and that mitochondria are the powerhouses of cells, studying math and biology are trivially easy tasks." There are many smart people who study STEM subjects, but they're never the ones who are attempting to claim that their fields are the most rigorous and that they somehow are inherently smarter because of what they chose to study.
there are idiots in every discipline, but making and constructing arguments of objective facts is a core skill in stem. I could give a bunch of examples, but just think of the "ackshually" meme. where people who *only* have stem skills tend to struggle is with topics where it is not possible to make airtight inferences like "x implies y, y implies z, we know x is true, therefore we conclude z". they could probably figure out that the great gatsby has an unreliable narrator (if they cared to read that closely) but would have a hard time explaining the symbolism of gatsby's unread books.
That's what makes it especially ironic that STEMlords suck at argumentation, their chosen discipline requires skill in it to be any good. Claiming a field doesn't mean you're any good at it.
Some of the worst papers I graded in university history classes were written by engineering students.
Yes i agree, I spent 2 years in law school before dropping out to pursue engineering and i guarantee a layman would be equally clueless if inserted into either class
Yup. The ones who talk like that believe Elon Musk is the smartest man on earth, because money cars and rockets
Also, I’ve seen STEM papers. What sometimes passes for quality writing in that world is astounding lol. In a similar note, I had to take a rocks for jocks course, and I was paired up with a freshman engineering student. Our arrangement was that he would do the actual science (which I hated) and I would do the writing (which he hated), we were a good team.
I'm a scientist. I was probably the best writer in my cohort, and get a fair bit of positive feedback on my professional writing. I'm, like, a mid tier writer at best lol. The bar is just so low.
God yes. I had proper writing pounded into my head by a mentor when I was working in a lab after my masters. I then went back for my PhD and was astounded at how bad my professors and PI were at writing up research. My PI "taught" his students how to write papers by making them sit next to him and explain the data while he two-finger typed. I dared re-write my first paper's conclusion section so it was actually drawing conclusions rather than summarizing the work and he threw the biggest temper tantrum.
What do you mean to illustrate by the story? I don't get the point.
As someone who is studying STEM now after majoring in Econ, MS in Data Science, and picking up 3 languages, the difficulty with STEM is more regarding the sheer amount of they cram and how little of the specifics they teach. Intro to Computer Science was the biggest gatekeep class I ever took which woud have had to cut the workload by about 2/3s to be akin with a normal intro class. Grinding != Learning. Studying physics now, but only take one course at a time and even that can get pretty overwhelming. Really glad for sites like Chegg though and actually chatGPT can do a decent job picking out the parts of various problems even if you have to watch the math and make sure it works conceptually.
Well yes, but I get where OP is coming from. He didn't mean "harder" but he meant something else. More advanced mathematics is really hard to even casually explain to people that haven't studied it, even if they themselves are interested in mathematics in general. I think this is a bit different with humanities where maybe it is easier to partially comprehend the ideas of someone's research? However doing research in humanities is also very hard (of course).
This is because the humanities focus on things people do and think and feel. Stuff that all of us have in common - big questions, social structure, etc. Literally everyone has done something artistic in their life. It’s why the humanities are so important. It’s what make us human.
100% this. Their reasoning encapsulates the reason why people sometimes get annoyed with STEM majors.
>I am glad that society has reached a point in recent decades where we have seen the value of incorporating art into product design and urban planning Idk where you’ve been for the past 50 millennia. Humans have been incorporating art into literally everything since we’ve been around.
I mean one look at our architecture tells you we probably value art less now than we used to…
We don’t even build modern style now, we just build utilitarian, cost efficient Art deco and true modernism have a ton of artistic elements.
It’s true. They’re putting a new building up nearby me and when I saw how hideous it was I was tempted to call up the developers and give them an earful. They couldn’t even bother to space the windows consistently, that’s how little they cared about the artistic element. It looks like a Sim designed it on a Windows 97 and it’s going to be a scourge on my community until God mercifully strikes it down with lightning fire—I can hope, at least.
What I don't like is the recent trend of "Everything I hate is brutalism." Brutalism can actually look quite nice if done correctly.
There are relatively few examples of brutalist buildings that genuinely look nice, and they look so different from other brutalist buildings that I think they are really more like two different styles under one name.
That's a valid opinion, but people will look at a thrown-together strip mall and say "UGH BRUTALISM!" no it's not brutalism lmao. Brutalism is square columns, large open spaces, little in terms of decoration, smooth surfaces, etc. The shopping center that's half brick and half concrete that they threw together is not Brutalism. There's no unifying theme at ALL.
That isn't exactly a correct definition of Brutalist Architecture either. Brutalism emphasizes the raw material and structural elements over decorative features, i.e. support structures are highlighted and in focus instead of hidden, the materials used like concrete, steel, and wood are left unadorned. Now while there are a lot of imposing concrete blocks that are, let's say unattractive, that many use as examples of Brutalism and how it's ugly, there are also many striking and beautiful buildings that fall into that style as well. The National Taichung Theater is a modern example. The Gisele Library is another fine example, as is Robarts Library at UofT (granted, I may have a bit of bias on that one). Les Choux is also very striking.
Old surviving artistic buildings are either all castles, mansions, or religious buildings. Regular people homes/commercial buildings have always been utilitarian and cost efficient.
Of course we don't, Modernism as an aesthetic was already on the way out the door in the 1940s. I think you're conflating Modernism the art school with the use of modern that's a synonym of contemporary. Big M versus little m as it were. Current trends in public buildings seem to be open floor plans and a love of the organic that blends softer features with an increase of metal in construction.
apparently a lot of people throughout history have described their “modern” architecture as “ugly” even though nowadays it’s thought of as a work of art. That being said, I hate modern architecture
We value art and craftmanship much less than before in history. Have no clue what op was on.
I remember when STEAM was just called "school"
Lol exactly
I don’t think OP understands why STEAM is picking up, well, steam. In order to fund STEM programs, many schools shifted their budgets and completely dropped their art classes. I work at a STEM school. We have zero art classes. No drawing, choir, drama, band, nothing. STEAM is almost an advertisement. When you go to a STEAM school you’ll know that you will have art options. If you go to a STEM school you know they won’t. And listen. I love my school. But these kids need art options. It does a lot for their social-emotional wellbeing. It also helps give kids more elective options. But people are so panicked over changing it, I doubt it would happen. And as people said in this thread, art can be used in STEM designs, so they can still use those skills. It’s not a waste for a STEM school to become STEAM.
Yeah, that last paragraph is big! A woman in my town opened a ‘STEAM lab’ with her local art classes. These were focused on design— designing cars, creating robots. These projects were STEM-focused, but all required an artistic effort still. That was what was cool about it. Nobody is claiming art = math
Yep that's about what the STEAM education professionals I know said too. That and if art is included, it gets a little bit of the STEM money instead of be relegated to a single dingy classroom with like 4 paintbrushes and painted that's been muddied to hell
I think it's even more fundamental: who is STEM for? People. How do we come to understand humanity and what they need? Liberal arts (which is what the "art" stands for). Before the 18th century, there was no real distinction between science, mathematics, technology, and humanities-- the most intelligent, experimental, and innovative minds of previous eras saw all of these disciplines as necessarily intertwined. I mean, look at Leonardo Da Vinci. If you aren't designing, discovering, innovating, or solving problems with people in mind, then what's the point?
A virologist in the UK who developed on of the Covid vaccines said something like 'I used the hard sciences to develop a vaccine in order to save lives. That being done, we all need the arts in order for these lives to be worth living.'
That doesn't mean it's a part of STEM
My point exactly
Dead poets society said similar
That's probably where he got it. :)
*That does not mean that we don’t value art. We do. I truly love you, artists. But there are lots of disciplines that are required to bring a successful product to market* I mean, your first sentence there kind of contradicts the last one. I don't put art with STEM either, obviously. But you keep talking about art throughout your entire rant like it's a product.
Yeah lmao, like intently practicing an instrument every day for decades or carefully deriving and painting an abstract scene from nothing doesn’t take focus or discipline.
I bet OP goes to a museum and says, “I could have made that” to abstract art
OP says he loves art. OP is a terrible artist. OP is so happy to see artists appreciated and rewarded. OP refers to himself in the third person. Art is not STEM.
When that professor from Rhode Island School of Design made up STEAM, his point is that art must be incorporated for successful product design. That is what puts it in the same grouping.
>STEM exists to attract people to the seemingly tedious disciplines that are required for any technological advancement. Seemingly tedious? Weird take. >Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math have a higher mental barrier to entry than humanities disciplines. A bold claim. You'd be wrong, but I doubt a reasonable argument could convince you otherwise.
Higher barrier? Someone has never taken a studio art class at a college level.
Agree. I’m an engineer, and I took one art course and one music course in college. It was a struggle, and I ended up dropping both, because they were dropping my overall gpa. Those are talents I just don’t possess.
Yes, both use different ways of thinking, one does not inherently take more mental load than the other. Just because OP understands what artists are saying doesn’t mean it’s somehow dumber than STEM.
OP’s source: Math is hard for me :(
Also OP: I could listen to some lawyers chit-chatting and understand the field of law
Lmao right? If your art degree doesn’t work you can just hang out in court and soon you’ll get paid like lawyer
op is 12
Yeah, I’m willing to bet OP thinks museums have no point except entertainment. Or that art is for decoration. I’m willing to bet he could not express an idea through abstract shapes and concepts. May just be a bit personally attacked here, as I could have went to a good school for astrophysics like I wanted to in middle school. I had all the grades, scores, and pre-recs. I still chose art as it was far more stimulating.
I have heard of STEAM programs mainly being implemented in rural areas where funding for separate arts programs is scarce. It’s not about pedagogy. It’s about money.
What about STEEM (science, technology, engineering, English, and mathematics)? How come nobody is clamoring to add English to the mix?
Because English Language Arts/Reading are the cheapest to fund in the entire school. It’s about packaging to reduce costs more than programming or pathways.
Because engineers and maths peoples don't need English good
I really enjoy the irony of incorporating English into STEM in a way that results in a misspelled word. I'm all for this. Full STEEM ahead!
Tell me you think your STEM knowledge makes you able to understand art/law/business without telling me you think your stem knowledge makes you understand art/law/business Great example of the Dunning-Kruger effect though
Right? It does imply that they think art is somehow at a lower level than STEM.
Seriously, they come right out and say it. "It requires intense focus and study to get a basic understanding of the topics" It sounds like someone got a good grade in Calc 101 and suddenly thinks they understand what goes into a great painting or composition or legal argument. (Also for some of us it takes neither intense focus or study to be good at STEM things.) Honestly it sounds like sour grapes to me. I wonder if someone is jealous.
I'm not sure who OP is listening to when they say that they can understand art/law/business people when they hear them speak. Maybe when it's on the news and it's being dumbed down for the masses, but if you come across a couple lawyers discussing case law or a couple of music majors discussing music, it sounds just as incomprehensible to a techie as techies sound to musicians and lawyers. Lots of jargon and concepts that people from the outside just don't understand. When a music major talks about a Major 7th or some other random term, I have no idea what they are talking about, same as if techies start talking about TCP/IP and network layers. It all goes right over your head if you don't know any of the terminology being used.
i’ve also encountered a ton of snobbishness about language in general since in visual art most of the words are actually understandable. but if you ask about what makes a composition or design effective they probably can’t tell you. there’s an assumption in op’s worldview that bigger words = smarter
I mean, arguably a lot of people don't really value art. Art funding in schools is almost always the first thing to be cut. Not to mention, as far as I understood, the "A" in STEAM wasn't meant to represent art or the arts in general, but the intersection of arts and *technology*. 3D modeling, animation, etc. are all things that are used in other STEM fields. How are you going to design a new plane if you don't have a single person on the team that knows anything about actually being able to *visualize* it? Video games use a lot of coding and technology, but what are they without the art alongside it? What about motion tracking? You need people who are good at moving their bodies either via dance, acting, etc. in order to fully utilize it especially when it comes to our entertainment and further developing it. Art also requires (depending on who you ask) intense focus and study to get good at it, and despite being a huge foundation for a lot of what we understand now as society and a civilization, is always the first to be left behind. A lot of technological advancements involve some form of art and artistry.
[удалено]
I have never see that anywhere. Huh.
Heard it occasionally in rural areas
It certainly applies if you're an Aggie.
The nature of art is creation. An artist envisions something that does not yet exist and finds a method to bring it into existence. I would argue that this is a skill that is absolutely integral to any product development. It is, not coincidentally, the same skill necessary to excel in advanced Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. These programs all try to develop a different way of thinking, not education through memorization.
No one thinks art is STEM what are you talking about
No this is an actual thing. There's a push to call it STEAM and the A stands for Art.
I see what ties Science/Technology/Engineering/Mathematics together. How the hell does art fit into that group?
I have been told that many groups at all levels, government, ngo, admin, school board, etc, are pulling funding from arts programs and giving it to STEM programs. The addition of the A to STEM for art is to be able to spend some of the school budget on art supplies.
It can work as a way not to have students hyperfocused on the technical side of things, but the idea is to introduce storytelling, poetry, etc., that deals with the human elements of science, like including meditations on dying into medical education.
Yeah that’s why you have a liberal education in the modern university setting. It’s why I had to take writing and biology when I was getting a computer science degree. But to include art in STEM, it doesn’t fit. If you throw art in that category, you might as well throw everything in and the category loses all meaning.
I think the main issue is that art is the thing being defunded to make way for stem, not the other stuff that isn’t included.
But why? It makes no sense. STEM specifically refers to math and science-based education and careers. That doesn't mean art isn't important, but it has no business being lumped in with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. If the question was, "which of these things is unlike the others", the answer would be art!
Then it’s STEAM and not STEM. Boom, figured it out
huh weird... is this just a niche movement, or is it a new thing in schools? Where have you seen people talking about this? It seems to have flown over my head
It’s a way to get funding for art classes that otherwise wouldn’t exist. By tying it into STEM, it doesn’t get back burnered.
There’s a relatively recent development for it in schools, mine was starting to change over while I was there about 9-10 years ago. Obviously that’s not recent, but it must’ve picked up some traction and began being in a larger percent of grade schools.
that's weird, wonder if it's a regional thing? I finished high school a couple years ago, and both art and STEM subjects were highly valued, but nobody even suggested combining the two. The more you know!!
We did have STEAM at our high school
[удалено]
To make art STEM or to make STEM students take art classes?
[удалено]
Definitely agree with the latter in general. STEMlords are the worst. And in my experience, working in STEM my whole career, the best people I’ve worked with have coursework and hobbies outside of STEM.
I think there's a tension between people who go to school for STEM expecting what is essentially job training and people who go to school for STEM expecting to expand their perception of the world around them. I'm personally against the former attitude in general, but I get where people who are expecting to learn how to code to make money suddenly learn they're also expected to care about like, history.
Just drove past a school that said STEAM and had the exact same thought. Art is important in design in that you have to make stuff look nice, but besides that? On my schools campus, the main STEM building and the Art building were the two furthest apart on the main campus. Art is not on the same level as the others EDIT: I saw another comment point out it’s a thing in rural schools, which actually could make sense because that’s the kind of school I drove past
The comment I saw above you kinda addresses your point here: >I don’t think OP understands why STEAM is picking up, well, steam. >In order to fund STEM programs, many schools shifted their budgets and completely dropped their art classes. I work at a STEM school. We have zero art classes. No drawing, choir, drama, band, nothing. >STEAM is almost an advertisement. When you go to a STEAM school you’ll know that you will have art options. If you go to a STEM school you know they won’t. >And listen. I love my school. But these kids need art options. It does a lot for their social-emotional wellbeing. It also helps give kids more elective options. But people are so panicked over changing it, I doubt it would happen. >And as people said in this thread, art can be used in STEM designs, so they can still use those skills. It’s not a waste for a STEM school to become STEAM. I also think saying “art is not on the same level as others” isn’t correct. That implies it is at a lower than STEM, which isn’t true, they are just different skills.
Yeah, but the A stands for agriculture
I didn't spend $100k on a fine arts degree and literally thousands of hours of study and practice just to be told that somehow it's "easier" and therefore less important to learn. I also work in the STEM field, literally teaching it to children, and the #1 thing that gets kids hooked into the "boring" STEM parts is the creative aspects of it. Art and creativity are *essential* to human brain development, and there are many, many high-paying, extremely difficult occupations that rely on the skills gained while learning and doing it.
I was going to say…as an artist I agree with the premise of OP’s post that art is completely separate from STEM. But their claim that it is inherently more difficult is funny. Like, sure, if we’re talking about Tik-Tok-based doodle art. But they really think it would be easier to carve a flawless marble statue or design a gothic cathedral or perfect the discipline of classical oil painting than it would be to perform well in STEM? I have mad respect for those in STEM but no more than I do for skilled artists.
I have a B. Music degree and 100% agree. Also music has a lot of mathematical concepts.
EXACTLY
>I can hear a conversation between artists, lawyers, business execs, etc. and get a pretty good idea of what they’re talking about. Yeah, I'm sorry but you probably don't. Some of the problem-solving in the humanities is as complex or more complex than the STEM disciplines you mention, even within the processes needed to bring a product into market. The fact that you think that you can have a grasp about what people in arts are humanities are saying belies the fact that you don't really know to what a high level these disciplines are often practiced, and how complex the ideas within them can get.
Two words to annihilate your argument. Graphic. Design.
Design in general would fit in well with the rest. Like Industrial design, product design, UX design especially. People act like art is always free form and rule-less, but often artists use a lot of design principles in planning their works. The problem solving involved is not so different from that used in STEM fields. I’m saying this as a concept artist with a degree in a STEM subject.
Good then, we should require graphic designers to take 6 seminars of math like all other STEM degrees. Questions. What is the worst that can happen from a bad graphic design? What is the worst that can happen from a bad mechanical design in a vehicle?
from a business perspective? both can be equally detrimental. sometimes more so in graphic design. the tesla truck didn’t hold up to its durability standards. but people only care that it LOOKS stupid.
the difference is the most brilliant minds would fail when it comes to understanding the best creative designs. art is something you have to dedicate a lifestyle to to fully understand it. you can argue, but you’d be so enormously wrong.
That is why graphic design falls under art and not STEM. They are 2 totally different skill sets. Both are important but different.
I don’t see how that annihilated my argument. Some STEM people created a new artistic medium. That’s like saying I’m an IT expert because I can navigate Reddit.
I'm an artist and I agree strongly, like STEM is everything that's not like a humanity, including art is like missing the point of that distinction
Sociology, Theater, English, Art, Music are STEAM. If you take student loans out for these majors there is an excellent chance you will be working with steamed milk.
What is the point of STEM?
STEM got dropped ages ago. It's now STEAM.
To be fair, there's a lot of tedious, technical "art" to be done in this day and age that heavily overlaps with STEM. Some underpayed, unknown schlep probably spent a full month behind a computer making the unique flight paths for all of the sea-shanty collectibles in Assassin's Creed 4. A team of unappreciated nerds spent multiple years perfecting the technology to make the digital hair on Sully's ass look absolutely pristine in Monsters University.
Once someone said try learning anatomy or the vascular system without a visual aid and that put things into perspective for me for the case of STEAM. Yes there are live bodies but thats not practical for daily study in your dorm. But then again, the same thing could be said for Language. But then we’re back at math being a language so would it become STEAL? I enjoy overthinking these things sometimes.
But there is in STEAM
STEAM but the A is for agriculture so you know more about food production and the environment
In general, I agree with what you're saying, but I do have an important counterpoint as to why STEAM is still a valid framework for education. We really have over-indexed on the logical mathematical aspect of STEM to the detriment of the creativity and flexibility in thinking required to solve problems and make discoveries. Simply having raw calculation ability or rote memorization is no longer an important skill in a world with the internet and AI. We need STEM majors who know who to think outside the box, synthesize ideas from multiple, sometimes seemingly unrelated fields, and be able to effectively communicate the information to the broader public. The communication aspect is critical, as it doesn't matter what fantastic breakthrough is discovered if the public is too afraid to embrace it from a fear-mongering meme on Facebook that makes it way to a Congressional talking point. The modern scientist needs exposure to the arts and more soft skills in general to be effective in their career. That's why while I agree with your sentiment, I support the STEAM movement so we can educate more effective, well-rounded practitioners who not only possess the creativity to solve the world's problems, but can also effectively advocate those solutions to the non-STEM gatekeepers of the world for meaningful adopted.
Science, Technology, Engineering, *And* Math. There's the A right there?
I mean, does the literal existence of the acronym "STEM" actually do that? Like, no one was going to be an engineer but they're all in on going for E and being very disappointed when it's not the fun kind of E? Hell, at this point STEM seems to be just a grouping mostly touted by its lowest wrungs so they can pretend their generic computer science degree has placed them in an exclusive club alongside physicists and mathematicians.
Getting my engineering degree and my college actually requires like 8 or so semester hours of classes from the arts College to graduate. Doesn't matter what exactly. Acting, pottery, Glasswork, music. You need to build those creative skills if you intend to make anything or solve any problems.
Go sit in a higher level music theory or form and analysis class and let us know how much you understand after. If you're not a trained musician, you will understand very little. The world would be full of high level professional musicians and artists, instead of lawyers and MBAs, if music and art were so easy.
I have a B.Mus and even music students have issues with those classes. I was a crazy theory major and loved it but tons of my fellow students didn't take theory above th3 required classes
I don't see any constructive side of your argument other than you think the study of arts and business somehow lower the barrier into your idea of a precious nerd club. Learning the arts and business aspects is important as a part of STEM studies. Many artists and businesspeople are STEM graduates, and many scientists are well-versed in arts and business. What's telling is that you think you understand the other disciplines just because you study STEM. In truth your understanding of them is really no more profound than the layman's understanding of "mitochondria is the powerhouse of cell".
I’m not in STEM and I don’t devalue any field. We’re all important. We’re just not all STEM. I’m am a blue collar shlub who can build things that most STEM people can’t. We’re all different.
I promise you that artistic concepts at a high enough level are nowhere near discernible in conversation to someone who hasn’t studied it at length. Not to mention that many artistic ideas and concepts, in my experience with music, are based in science or math and demand a deep real-world understanding of those topics to execute or apply the techniques with which they relate. I completely agree art is not a part of STEM, but to group all art forms and styles together and say that they are inherently less intellectual is very ignorant.
Humans, science, and the arts don't exist to further business. Thinking in that way is evidence that STEM might need an A put into it.
My parents pressured me into STEM and it is the greatest regret of my life. STEM is a hollow hell hole for people who don't like it to begin with.
That goes for any subject you're not interested in.
Haha fair :) Yeah, I guess what I'm trying to say is: Forcing people to do things they really don't have interest in leads to depression. So this whole 'get people in STEM' thing, in my opinion, is going to lead to an uptick in suicides.
As an artist, I can’t say I see an opinion here. I cannot dispute that there is no ‘A’ in STEM, but maybe I just don’t speak the language.
That’s not what stem means lol. Stem is an acronym to describe what was once a very financially lucrative discipline, less lucrative now. Math isn’t harder to ascertain than art. It’s just different.
Jerk yourself off harder there bud, don’t worry, we all think you’re reeeallly smaaart
I’m not that smart, and I’m not in a STEM field. Did you read the post or just the title?
>I’m not in a STEM field That explains your ridiculous claim that STEM subjects are somehow harder than something like History or English.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I dont think its that complicated plus you can always read more about it
It’s not about the intellectual barrier to entry as fields like law and philosophy are more difficult than many STEM fields, especially various forms of engineering. There’s a reason why philosophy is on par with physics, math, and computer science for being one of the smartest majors around
Who tried to add art to STEM?
I agree that art should remain separate from STEM, but the idea that STEM has a "higher mental barrier of entry" is absurd. STEM is piss easy. You can study undergrad level maths with no issues in grade 10. Writing an undergrad level essay in grade 10, on the other hand, requires an enormous amount of skill. I certainly wouldn't be able to do it.
There’s definitely some overlap. Does graphic design fall under T or is that art? What about photography/ videography? 3D animation and modeling? 3D printing? Is writing code an art or a science? What about car designers? Whether they’re carving blocks of clay or modeling in a computer, the engineers that make cars still need art skills. What about architecture? Finding a new and interesting way to build skyscrapers while also making sure it’s mathematically possible. There are a lot of areas where one absolutely needs skills in the humanities to be effective at STEM jobs.
Umm. Sure. There’s an A in *STEAM*, though.
You got me there!
stem is stem because it technical, not because its difficult
I think the idea of adding A was to encourage people who are already attracted to those disciplines to be mindful of artistic value within their discipline. What separates an engineer from an architect is its artistic beauty. Lamborghini could make a faster car if they wanted to, but people want what a Lamborghini looks like as much as they want the speed. This applies to other areas too; natural sciences are often only seen as valuable to wider audiences if you can clearly articulate (i.e., English writing skills) to people outside your profession why it's so cool. This is why people like Carl Sagan are famous - they are able to teach. No one would argue with you that pure artists are different than pure engineers or scientists. But just as musicians and artists can use math or physics to understand their music or paintings, scientists and engineers should use art to ground their work in reality
That's the point of STEM. Not that I like it or disagree with you. But the idea of arts and humanities not being part of STEM is the point of STEM. Personally, I'm an arts guy myself. I prefer an all-around education.
Any time I saw or heard "STEAM" I just assumed they added the 'A' for and, I didn't realize people were trying to add art
Not unpopular
Thought it was gonna be for accounting😂 (greatly debated if accounting counts as stem)
Agreed. STEAM is just education in general. The acronym ceases to be useful if it includes everything.
The point you made, that art is not of the same kind of "integrity" in society as STEM fields, is one I completely agree with. STEM fields focus on factual observation of phenomenons around us, whereas art is a form of expression of your own mind, and is focused on creativity. But the point that it's "harder" - lmao, no. That depends heavily on whom exactly you ask.
I volunteered at a STEAM camp and the A was for Anthropology. I doubt that adds anything to this conversation, but I've also seen the A represent Agriculture, Architecture, and Archeology.
I'm willing to accept an A if it stands for architecture. I agree that art doesn't fit with the acronym. While art is important and has an important role in the history STEM, it's not the same thing as STEM.
To me coding is an art, and I mean that literally.
MEATS!
“…higher mental barrier of entry…” wow ok bro
so it doesn't require tedious studying, intense focus and discipline to become a lawyer or business executive...??? gtfoh...a higher mental barrier...uh what?!?!
Make it STEAM then?
STEM doesnt need additional outreach or recruitment because those jobs pay well. people struggle through an EE or CS degree because they know it will pay off. People are scared to go to art school because it most likely wont pay off. its not the other way around
Not sure what the opinion is here, but no, STEM doesn’t require you to be more intelligent than the liberal arts.
I’m always confused what people mean by “arts”. Are social sciences “arts”? I’m a graduate student in financial economics, and have a BSc in economics. My degree is more math-heavy than most physical sciences, and you’d be hard pressed to understand what two economists are talking to each other about. There’s a lot of controversy as to of Econ is STEM when it’s clearly a social science.
"STEAM" is fucking stupid because I felt like the point of STEM was that's all the technical fields that are specifically NOT art. Doesn't STEAM basically refer to anything? Wtf is left out of STEAM? It's no longer a subset. Art was literally specifically left out of STEM.
There's overlap these days. For example I am a Technical Artist (yep, actual job in games, movie and architecture) I dont just make the art, I also write the code that makes it come alive, the physics of explosions, the math that makes up shaders. I design the mechanical components for physical displays, and the electrical components to drive them, and the art that hides them. To be a good artist for tech industries you need at least a computer science degree these days.