If this tendency ended at the level of debate, we would easily ignore it as a distractive one. To some, the importance of the humanities is self-evident to whoever cared to know. As the old saying goes, good wine needs no bush. A good thing needs no advertisement or defence.
The assault on the humanities has been seen by some as a trap that should simply be avoided. Or else, instead of going on with progressive business, the humanities will be locked up in defensive explanation of their worth to people who might not even be interested in hearing. Sadly, for two major reasons, we can’t avoid the discussion.
One, it directly informs education policy. If you simply ignore the misguided sentiments, they will (as they already are) become the basis of shaping our education system.
We already see the preferential treatment of the sciences and ‘scientists’; the ill-thought scrapping of arts courses; and the scorched-earth policy in higher education funding. There would be nothing wrong with affirmative action in favour of the sciences as an undersubscribed crucial part of our education.
Such preferential assistance would be meant to bring them at par with the humanities. The problem is in the direction of promoting the sciences at the expense of the humanities. The language accompanying the preferential support for the sciences is so telling.
The president has been unequivocal in pushing for the sciences while calling humanities courses ‘useless’. He has cited courses such as Development Studies, Social Work and Social Administration (SWASA), Gender Studies, Conflict Management, History, Psychology, and so on.
During one of his recent Covid-19 addresses, he threw a snide remark at Literature by jesting that when the Jinja dam is blocked, you are not going to recite Shakespeare for it to get sorted.
You need engineers. Obviously! However, this is like mocking an axe for being unable to peel! On another occasion, he dismissively asked what those studying conflict management will be doing when there will be no more conflict. One wonders when such a time of terrestial tranquillity will come!
I think it is such superficial views on the humanities that make some people feel that there is no need for response. Yet, no matter how misguided, in a presidentialist system of governance, a president’s feelings about something cannot be ignored without consequences.
Sometimes all we have done as a form of ‘ignoring’ is by sheepishly nodding: ‘Yes sir’. It is painful to observe that academics who should have been central to guiding such debates are now the dog that is wagged by the tail – partly the reason we are despised.
The second reason why the barbs thrown at the humanities cannot be ignored is that they provide an opportunity for the humanistic disciplines to do more soul-searching on their relevance to the changing times. At times our comfort in the importance of what we do may lead us into a fossilising slumber.
A lot is changing, and faster than it has ever happened in human history. Has the curriculum and teaching of the humanities changed to speak to the changes or it is simply a continuation as though no change has occurred? Through such practices, the humanities actively participate in their own death.
We should be asking ourselves; how do Philosophy, History, Literature, Religious Studies, and others, speak to our current circumstances? When we turn ourselves into dinosaurs, we have no right to insist on existence.
Last week, the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Makerere University held a loaded national conference under the theme: Humanities and Humanistic Social Sciences Scholarship for a New Era. Over 120 research papers were presented, and a couple of engaging panel discussions some of which included critical actors from the wider public.
Listening in, one got the feel that this is part of the direction the humanities should be taking, vividly demonstrating their relevance and readiness to take on new challenges. Only a person so determined at hating the humanities left with doubts as to whether we should support such scholarship to prevail.
One of the participants observed that academics in the humanities sometimes fail to show their relevance by locking themselves up at their ivory towers, hardly taking part in public initiatives that squarely fall under their scholarly realm. This is an observation we should take very seriously as academics in general.
Many people are not amused by the silence of a vast majority of us over matters they expect us to be vocal about in putting our privilege of education to societal use.
Quite often, we hear but act dumb or choose to speak in tongues. However, this ought not to determine whether the humanities should be emphasised or not. It is simply a call to self-assessment.
Clearly, science cannot prosper on its own. Many scientific innovations thrive on knowledge from the humanities about the behaviour, inclinations, motivations, and perceptions of people. The Covid-19 pandemic has taught us much more about the complementarity of the arts with the sciences.
We have learnt that it is not enough to make a vaccine if you cannot understand what shapes people’s opinions about them and uptake. Scientists can come up with SOPs, but they cannot implement them without understanding how society operates.
We live in an era where truths are so mixed up with lies, making it very difficult to discern which is which. If we do not emphasise critical thinking in our education, science will become useless. And, indeed, if science is not balanced with training of the heart, it easily turns into a monster.
The author is a teacher of philosophy.
