MIT's Prowess in the Humanities

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1

<p>I recently had to counter act someone else's assertions in another thread about how all that MIT is good at is Math and Science. This is really not quite true, and happens to be a very common misconception. I thought I'd re-post my post into the MIT Thread:</p>

<hr>

<p>"MIT sucks at anything not related to science"</p>

<p>Since when was this true?</p>

<p>MIT has a world renown programs in Political Science, Economics, and Bussiness/Management.</p>

<p>Its English Humanities departments are no less excellent either, consisting of a world renown staff that has won numerous awards of high distingiushment in their field. And yes, this includes the Pulitzer Prize, quite possibly the highest distingiushment given to writers (Noam Chomsky anyone?). </p>

<p>MIT also has a cutting edge Comparitive Media Studies program. For those of you who may not know what this is exactly, it is:</p>

<p>"Comparative Media Studies represents a new paradigm in media scholarship, one which merges together the best conceptual models from a range of different disciplines to address issues of media content, context, and change. It is comparative in multiple senses -- comparative across media, across historical periods, across national borders, and across disciplinary perspectives."</p>

<p>Furthermore, I know two professors who turned down job offers from Yale and Harvard because they were more attracted to the higher rigour and respect that undergrad students give to Prof's at MIT (Note: I am not saying this statement is true, but just that it was one of THEIR major reasons of choosing MIT instead). </p>

<p>And, MIT's students are no slouches when it comes to Humanities either. With a median verbal score only 10 points lower than Harvard students, it's students are excellent writers and students of humanities (I know SAT scores are not 100% comprehensive, but it is a simple number to refer to in this case).</p>

<p>It is kind of like when a SUPER AMAZINGLY hot girl also happens to be smart too. When guys talk about her, they highlight and focus not on her smarts, but her incredibly awesome and smoking hot bod. While the girl is smart, it is not what she'd be known for among guys (sad, yes).</p>

<p>It is kind of like MIT's excellence in the Math/sciences, which is quite absurd and off the charts. So, when people talk about MIT, they highlight its excellence in the Math/Sciences rather than English/Humanities.</p>

<p>So, no, MIT does not SUCK at anything not related to Science. Quite the opposite.</p>

<hr>

<p>I encourage other people who know more about the Humanities/English offerings at MIT to mention other positive things about the excellent non math/science resources. </p>

<p>Let's make this a nice reference thread for people who think that all MIT kids can do is count numbers and play with chemicals!</p>

2

<p>Great graduate program in Philosophy.</p>

3

<p>
[quote]
It is kind of like when a SUPER AMAZINGLY hot girl also happens to be smart too.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is way loaded. What about when a SUPER AMAZINGLY smart girl also happens to be good-looking too?</p>

4

<p>MIT's creative writing program is particularly strong with people like Junot Diaz and Joe Haldeman. Also, the program gets well known writers to teach as visiting professors.</p>

5

<hr>

<p>"'It is kind of like when a SUPER AMAZINGLY hot girl also happens to be smart too.'</p>

<p>This is way loaded. What about when a SUPER AMAZINGLY smart girl also happens to be good-looking too?"</p>

<hr>

<p>Well, then the opposite is true. People will often talk and be in awe of her genious than her beauty.</p>

<p>Take Melis A. for example (MIT admissions blogger).</p>

<p>She is an incrediblely intelligent student at MIT, who had a perfect GPA (and many other wonderful accomplishments in academia/research), and is one of the very few in the country who has been honored with the Rhodes Scholar award.</p>

<p>She also happens to be pretty too, and really sweet! But, when people talk about her, they say, OMGZ PERFECT GPA RHODES SCHOLAR SHE IS A GENIOUS!!!!!!!!1!!11!!one11one!!1one111</p>

6

<p>Nato, I agree with you, but to some extent you're preaching to the choir here. :)</p>

7

<p>I agree with Jessie, but some good examples of MIT humanities prowess can be found on OpenCourseWare.</p>

8

<p>Yes, I understand that I'm kind of preaching to the choir. However, there are some people who come to this MIT forum to learn more about the school, and a common misconception/question that interested students have about it is "Is MIT only good at Math/science?" This thread is for them, and also a reference thread when someone in another thread says "MIT is only good at math/science."</p>

<p>So back to the threads purpose:</p>

<p>My AP English teacher today was teaching us about "close readings," and a major reference he used was MIT's definition of it and how to analyze a piece of text within a piece of literature and it's place in the bigger picture. And, to boot, my teacher is actually a Harvard grad!</p>

<p>I thought it was amusing that he was using MIT as a role model for this special kind of analysis, and not his alma mater or a university more known for its liberal arts background. Go MIT! =)</p>

9

<p>JUNOT WINS THE PULITZER!</p>

<p>[url=<a href="http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/diaz-pulitzer-0407.html%5DJunot"&gt;http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/diaz-pulitzer-0407.html]Junot&lt;/a> D</p>

10

<p>Wonderful! Does he still teach undergrad classes there?</p>

11

<p>Junot is on his sabbatical this academic year. He should be coming back next year to teach (not entirely too sure).</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
Wonderful! Does he still teach undergrad classes there?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Several of my friends had him for undergrad classes, so I'm guessing he will continue to teach them when he returns from sabbatical.</p>

13

<p>What is amazing is that Diaz is actually the third humanities professor at MIT to win a Pulitzer Prize. History professor John Dower won one in 2000 for nonfiction and music professor John Harbison won one in 1987 for music composition.</p>

14

<p>Just because MIT has a few prominent humanities professors means close to nothing. The reason that these professors are at MIT probably has more to do with money than anything, anyway.</p>

<p>Of course MIT students are going to have high SAT verbal scores, but 1) being good in math/science usually means that there's quite a bit of verbal intellect as well, 2) this is like commending the excellence of a high school class based on standardized test results from the first grade. Being a good student in the humanities extends so much farther than having a good SAT score, so I don't see your point. I'm not convinced that MIT doesn't have a good humanities program, but I think your arguments are weak and not particularly well thought-out.</p>

15

<p>"Just because MIT has a few prominent humanities professors means close to nothing. The reason that these professors are at MIT probably has more to do with money than anything, anyway."</p>

<hr>

<p>Does MIT pay its humanities professors a lot?</p>

16

<p>0.o Several of our graduate humanities programs (economics and philosophy) come to mind rate among the best in the world.</p>

17

<p>
[quote]
0.o Several of our graduate humanities programs (economics

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, I'm pretty certain that economics is a social science, not a humanity.</p>

18

<p>
[quote]
Does MIT pay its humanities professors a lot?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Unless things have changed significantly since I was there, the answer is no (obvious stars excepted). Salaries are almost always determined by supply and demand and for humanities academics, supply outstrips demand. Note that this applies primarily to junior faculty, at senior levels, most have proven themselves worthy, or left. But even if they have stayed, if they are not likely to be sought out and poached by a rival organisation, then they are unlikely to be especially highly compensated.</p>

19

<p>When I visited MIT, trying to make up my mind if it was for me, I sat in on no engineering or physical sciences classes. I presumed that they would be excellent. Rather, I sat in on a lot of humanities and arts classes, because these were important to me, and I had my doubts about MIT. My doubts were proven wrong. I attended MIT, and have never regretted that call.</p>

<p>The most significant reason that I doubted the quality, was the relatively low numbers of students choosing to major in the Humanities or Arts. I thought, before I went, that this would be a weakness. Instead it is a strength. MIT humanities and arts classes tend to be small. But most importantly, at many other schools there are some fantastic facilities (particularly in arts) that are reserved for the exclusive use of students majoring in those subjects. That just doesn't happen at MIT.</p>

<p>Most of the famous MIT faculty teach any undergraduates who sign up for there classes. At many rival schools, the famous faculty tend to teach graduate students primarily and undergraduate courses for majors in that field. As a rule (and there are exceptions), they do not teach level one classes in that field. For example, when I was a freshman, Noam Chomsky taught a freshman seminar. Yes, I know he is a linguist and therefore actually out of scope for this discussion, but the principle of "[someone you have heard of] teaches freshmen" still holds true and is rare in academia, but common at MIT. Yes, this is helped by the lack of a graduate student population studying English Literature, for example. But however it happens, an undergraduate majoring in Engineering will still have the opportunity to spend time with some extremely well regarded humanities faculty in a quite close environment. It doesn't matter how famous many of the faculty are at another institution if, as an undergraduate, you do not get to study with them.</p>

20

<p>


</p>

<p>I guess you have a very narrow or I have a very wide definition of the humanities. I think most people would agree with me in including the social sciences into the humanities. The distinction seems to be fields of study not related to the natural sciences (philosophy, literature, art, psychology, etc).</p>

<p>Obviously some of them have scientific elements and employ the scientific method, they're the sciences dealing with human activity, culture, and behavior.</p>

<p>But if you'd like me to rephrase it to suit your definition, several of our graduate HASS programs rate among the best in the world.</p>