"Since science and technology are becoming more and more essential to modern society, schools should devote more time to teaching science and technology and less to teaching the arts and humanities."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
Science and technology have revolutionized human existence. Right from invention of the wheel to the Internet; science has continuously changed the way human beings live- for the better or the worse. Today, science is so hopelessly entwined with our lives that to imagine an existence without it is extremely difficult, if not downright impossible.
However, making schools devote more time to teaching science and technology and less to teaching the arts and humanities can be an overzealous, misguided obsession with science. In fact, it is akin to slitting the golden goose that lays golden eggs in hope of getting all the eggs at once.
Science has no place for subjects like political science, business administration, product design and graphics. Science may make life better, but it does not teach people to deal with practical realities of life. Science is an essential building block of life. It is not, however, the only important part. Absence of arts and humanities has the potential of having a destabilizing influence on the society as a whole and may derail the progress of science itself. Ignoring them can be, hence, as catastrophic as ignoring science.
A key thing to remember is that, historically, business and military have been the driving force behind technology. Without patronage of the Pentagon, the world would not have got either databases (Oracle) or Internet. Similarly, businesses and governments contribute more to technology than technocrats themselves. This brings in a stark reminder: however important technology may be, it is essentially a strategic tool in hands of people who can see life beyond the confines of a laboratory. And such people are not necessarily from science background. A good example is that none of the US Presidents that I can think of were either engineers or scientists, including our current President. This should be enough to convince most people that scientific education alone is not enough to build a modern, prosperous society.
Talking about arts, arts are a testimony to success of science and not a rival to be wiped off. As advances in science make life easier, people find more time to pursue art. The science also contributes to and enriches arts continuously: the mediums to express art have grown to include paper, cloth, canvas, glass and , now, even computers. Arts make life enjoyable after science has made it livable. Promoting one on the expense of the other is neither advisable nor desirable. Imagine having a world without Sistine Chapel or Taj Mahal, without the music produced by Vivaldi, Mozart and Bach and without the mysterious smile of Mona Lisa. It would indeed be a dull world.
Concluding, I do not agree with the stated opinion. Even though science is important, its importance cannot be overemphasized. The essence of life is balance, where each element has a unique place. Science depends on other disciplines as much as other disciplines depend on science. Hence, devoting more time to science on cost of arts and humanities can be an egregious decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment