I’m currently doing Political Science, and minoring in English Studies and Cultural Studies. However, I am also doing contract work in film stills photography and advertising. Friends have always mistaken me for a media student or digital artist. I’ve dipped my fingers into theatre as well, and I must say that all these has allowed me to see things in a different perspective and apply oft-overlooked combinations of skills to solving certain challenges.The effects of ingesting Ionesco and Pinter have actually wormed their way into a few of my PS papers, how quaint eh..

Anything that enhances or broadens one’s mindset and skillset should always be embraced.
It never hurts to have something that adds to your value and pushes you a few inches ahead.

Right, maybe I’m plugging for my fellow liberal arts students when I say that while science may empower us with the product, the humanities will empower ourselves with the ethics to debate if it should be used.

They can then specialize/focus at the graduate studies level.

Vice versa, educate a humanities/arts under grad with genetics of diseases.

We are all walking biological systems. Should not be ignorant of our own developmental biology as we have to confront and live with diseases at any point in our life cycle.

_______________________
In a sense, I see NUS (and to some extent NTU) as performing a role that the state wants; provide enough professionals such as doctors, lawyers and engineers for the economy while allowing a certain segment of individual to pursue other interests. In a sense, there is no overt discouragement from pursuing the latter; because we have been politically socialized to think that the former is the “nature” road for Singaporeans to take. Thus, there does not seem to be deliberate attempts to prevent students from taking social sciences and the arts for example.

The fact is if one is interested in further study in an interdisciplinary subject (say philosophy of mathematics), being able to double major in math and philosophy would be a huge help. It shouldn’t be something that one has to fight for.

History is one of the most popular majors in the US, so it’s unsurprising that many history majors become famous.

I didn’t know that Edward Witten majored in history in college. I have heard rave reviews about his works from my friends who are physics majors. Thanks for that nugget. Also to point out, the new president of Harvard is a historian =p

I agree with your underlying message about attitude overcoming bureaucratic obstacles. Often, It’s about the attitude in creating your own opportunities.

In any case, the following link might be of interest to all. It is a blog by an associate professor of history. In this post, the professor lists famous professionals who majored in history:

http://doctorhistory.blogspot.com/2004/07/famous-history-majors.html

I do remember one of my peers in the Special Program of Science, NUS 4 years back, who managed to graduate with a double major in chemistry and psychology. He had a lot of trouble in dealing with the bureaucracy, despite the faculties are trying their best to help. Things are much more inflexible in the past as compare to today. Actually, if you really want it, you can fight for it.

My sense is always that you should never let school interfere with your education. It really does not matter what subject you study. If you are really interested in another subject, say economics or philosophy while you are studying science, you should just go and sit in for the lectures and vice versa.

In any case, the world’s number one theoretical physicist, Edward Witten, who also won a Fields Medal in Mathematics, did his basic degree in history and journalism (and was a campaign manager for the US presidential elections in 1972) before he studied postgraduate physics in Harvard. One interesting thing that came out of his arts degree, is that his research papers are written almost like newspaper articles, with complex mathematics and physical insights within.

In a sense, I see NUS (and to some extent NTU) as performing a role that the state wants; provide enough professionals such as doctors, lawyers and engineers for the economy while allowing a certain segment of individual to pursue other interests. In a sense, there is no overt discouragement from pursuing the latter; because we have been politically socialized to think that the former is the “nature” road for Singaporeans to take. Thus, there does not seem to be deliberate attempts to prevent students from taking social sciences and the arts for example.

Why I am encouraged by the recent government’s initiative is that it realizes that a globalized economy is so complicated that both real and corporate governance requires creative thinking and competence that is not simply linear and lateral. In other words, you need people who are able to do many things and consider multi factors at one go in a short period of time. Thus, I am thinking that that state may allow SMU and the new liberal arts college to go in that direction.

My caveat is that, in a way I am agreeing with Mr. Yeo, that they may not be “immediate” results from these experiments of SMU and the liberal arts college. Throwing Singaporeans and international kids in a liberal arts environment does not guarantee a renown politician, poet, thinker, economist, geologist, scientist. It might create confusion (Why should I study geology when I am interested in studio Art), tensions (Why am I doing group work with a PRC student) and struggles (Why is my professor asking me to link Heidegger with cognitive science?)

But it can also pay off. One can become more humble from confusion, more tolerant from tensions and a better thinker from struggling with ideas.

The challenge is as SMU moves towards a perception of “mainstream” in the next few years like that of NTU in the 1990s, whether such latent energies within “new” organizations can be sustained. Will the new liberal arts college attract the best and the experimental from the established universities or will it be a struggling outfit like that of Lingnan University in Hong Kong?

P.S. Lingnan is the only liberal arts college in Greater China based in Hong Kong.

My sentiments exactly. Why not? However, it seems to me that not everyone has the guts to say “Why not?” to radical ideas. I’ve enough experience in NUS to know. If you call for the establishment of “customised” degree (along with calls from MoE), perhaps it will provide a bigger impetus to change than a small-time blogger like me. In fact, allowing students to customise their degrees to follow their interest could very well be the path towards developing the creativity that Singaporean students have been criticised for lacking.

Indeed it need not be a zero sum game. I enjoyed the few life sciences classes I took purely out of interest (although it was tough for someone with no background in biology). I’m not sure how many Singaporeans see the value in a liberal arts education though.

To complement the liberal arts college that the government is thinking of setting up, the local universities should offer greater flexibility in allowing for students to tailor their own degrees. It seems that NUS has finally caught on somewhat, although I think that more can be done. I don’t see why a student who wants to do marketing, philosophy and bio-engineering should be denied a chance for such an education. Perhaps we should be moving towards “customised” degrees.

In a liberal arts college, one has to take classes from each of these disciplines. Often, taking a creative writing class informs on the way I understand historical events. Doing triple integrals in Calculus allows me to think of spatial notions in political science in a more systematic way.

A science student in such a college would have taken many social science, literature and humanities classes that would have inform greatly on the volitional aspects of science; on the usage, implementation and philosophy behind the discipline he is doing.

I guess education is also to make us humane, cultured and learned people; not simply as efficient digits in the economy =) I applaud the government’s latest initiative in thinking of setting up a liberal arts college in Singapore.

Also, I think Singapore, beside being an IT and biomedical hub, has also very good base on the humanities and social sciences. The East Asian Institute, ISEAS, IPS as well as our universities are great bastion of research in these areas. My only concern is whether such wealth of resources filter down to the ordinary undergraduates; whether undergraduates can access these opportunities to pursue their interests in these topics, EVEN if they may not be academics in the future. This is because I find doing research is the best way to learn and get interested in a topic.