the stormy present:

This is why I have a problem with these proponents of right-brain-left-brain theories, which have included some of my former schoolteachers, even one of the (otherwise) best and most inspirational teachers I've ever had.  As a student, I kept being presented over and over and over with this idea that I had to choose -- are you good at science and math, or are you good at writing and literature and history?  And the truth is, I have an aptitude for both, but this manner of approaching the world (and it is a manner of approaching the world, not just learning) imposed this artificial dilemma -- which am I?  It's not that I regret my choice, so much, it's that I regret the fact that I was told I had to choose, and believed it.

There are too many people on both sides of this divide who either don't know any better or have an interest in preserving the divide.

It leads to people in the humanities being completely innumerate, the mathematical equivalent of never having heard the name of Shakespeare or not being able to understand a newspaper article. It also lends to people in science and engineering who can't write to save their lives, even though they may spend a substantial amount of their professional life writing reports.

The reality of mathematics is that there is a lot of writing and that formulas are shorthand, except when one engages in calculation which is considered inelegant. But I am reminded of one time when two professors from teh University came to my high school to make a presentation about the university access examination and the one from the humanities, after stressing the importance of writing clearly and without errors she said something to the effect of "of course, in the science exams you don't need that. The other professor was a Mathematics professor I had met earlier and we looked at each other in horror - all you do in a math exam is write long streams of reasoning.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo