This one time, at The New Yorker, David Brooks explained how only science can help make the next generation less shallow by "filling the hole left by the atrophy of theology and philosophy."
I had some feelings about it.
I wish The New Yorker had told me back in 1994 that only science, and none of the other disciplines that explore "emotions, intuitions, biases, longings, predispositions, character traits, and social bonding" -- not to mention attachments, imagination, empathy, perception, discernment, meaning, and the importance of "the mental virtues that lead to practical wisdom" -- could tell us anything of value about humanity. I certainly wouldn't have wasted my time studying, writing, and teaching in the humanities. How dare we even call them that?!
From "What exactly do people think people in the Humanities do with their time?" (in medias res, January 2012)