Quote:
Originally Posted by KosmicKhaos
I think the broad use of the term "Art" is what makes people not like it to be included in STEM including myself. Art does not belong in the STEM acronym. "Art" is a far too broad term to include with the other subjects. I understand that parts of art can be used in STEM like design but I don't think its right to classify all of art with STEM.
Interesting perspective from another source-
"Art is often touted as a method of adding creativity to STEM—but keep in mind that engineers are rarely lacking for creativity and ingenuity. Just look at the world around you for proof."
Does art belong in STEM? No, but parts of it certainly do like design. However in my opinion those that do already fall under engineering. There is no reason to bring them together.
"en·gi·neer·ing
ˌenjəˈniriNG/
noun
the branch of science and technology concerned with the design, building, and use of engines, machines, and structures."
|
I certainly agree there's enough art encompassed in engineering for engineers' purposes, as this ought to be a tautology for any field. But using that as a reason to keep an A out of STE(A)M is clearly internally inconsistent: under that logic, the acronym should just be "E". I no more need to be reminded or compelled to have art in my engineering than I do math. While I won't pretend to know any objective purpose for the original STEM acronym, but it clearly isn't that.