Opinion: The humanities deserve to be taken seriously
———-
As a humanities student, I’m tired of being seen as lesser than my science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) counterparts. From time spent studying to amounts of motivation to future income, we humanities students are flooded with less-than-optimistic assumptions based on our major choices. We are seen as the less intelligent students of a “dying” field, and I’m sick of such gross mischaracterizations. In an attempt to challenge this harmful perception, I’d like to argue that the study of humanities is just as relevant and demanding as STEM.
 According to journalism professor and media researcher Alina Padilla-Miller, the study of humanities encompasses a “wide range of academic disciplines that focus on experience, expression, creativity and the intellect of humanity.” At UO, this includes subjects like English, history, language and philosophy, often intertwined with the Arts, both performing and visual.
 Most commonly, critics argue that the humanities lack practicality, claiming they fail to teach valuable, professionally-relevant skills. While these practical skills may be more obvious in fields such as engineering or business, I believe that the humanities hold profound value, both in professional and everyday contexts.
Humanities courses instill critical thinking and evaluative skills that are essential for higher-level thinking in all contexts. Without these skills and the broader perspective of cultural understanding, the content taught by other disciplines is meaningless; the application of knowledge requires nuance that can only be introduced through a humanities lens.
 The prevailing argument that the humanities are dying due to the modernizing world is also bogus. As technology advances, the humanities will evolve into new forms and purposes, similar to growth in other fields.
For example, Generative Artificial Intelligence has already proven to have a significant impact on the field. Padilla-Miller emphasizes the benefits of GenAI’s research and data analysis functions, along with the practice of “digital humanities.” An intersectional approach, digital humanities refers to the digital preservation of cultural artifacts, historical documents and art.
 Beyond practicality, the snobby notion that STEM students are more intelligent or driven than their peers is ridiculous. While STEM content can be challenging to grasp, requiring vast amounts of time and energy to succeed, the same can be said for any field of study.
Finley Arnott, a freshman humanities major, describes her academic experience thus far at UO as rigorous. “[My major] requires a lot of work. I write several essays a week and do hundreds of pages of reading,”Arnott said.
Knowing that workloads are subjective, we have to remind ourselves that their difficulty is determined by the individual, not onlookers who seek to validate their own school-related stressors. Feeling overwhelmed is not an excuse to look down on those who face academic experiences different from yours.
Instead of fostering competition between majors, I’d like to offer another option: an interdisciplinary alliance. While each major offers deeply different learning experiences, why is it not possible that disciplines have unique but equal strengths? Yes, a physics major may be more mathematically sound, but an English student will write a stronger essay. Additionally, no field could survive or progress without the developments made in other areas. Instead of wasting energy distinguishing between studies, it’s more beneficial to channel it into strengthening support for academia as a whole.
Recently, there’s no doubt that higher education is being threatened, largely by the radical right wing. With ongoing attacks on universities for supposedly indoctrinating students into “wokeism,” it is vital that disciplines unite. If higher education loses its value, there’s little hope for the future of humanities or STEM. Only together can we safeguard the integrity of our respective passions.