A recent update from a national higher education news service announced that two Canadian universities had received multi-million-dollar endowments to support the arts, acknowledging that, at long last, “the arts and humanities appear to be getting their day in the sun.” I have spent my career championing and fundraising for the humanities in Canada and abroad and must agree that the humanities and social sciences have seen their importance increasingly devalued in our national psyche. 

Some, including our own humanities and social science providers, frantically try to convince us of the pragmatic value of “soft skills.” The dismissive labeling of the difficult work we do as “soft” is patronizing when used by outsiders. It reflects an inferiority complex, and a deep devaluing of these skills by those who want to champion them. 

Advertisement

To call development of core communication skills, of deep analytic talents, of championing dialogue and negotiation skills, understanding historic movements and creating a vast range of complex artistic ventures “soft” is misleading, if not condescendingly wrong. There is nothing soft about encounter. There is nothing soft about listening well and bringing diverse viewpoints together. There is nothing soft about an ability to think creatively by drawing on complex philosophies, theories, and perspectives. 

Advertisement

On the contrary, these are the hardest skills. Many deep divisions we witness in our global cultures right now have arisen from the erosion of these fundamental skills that empower individuals, communities, and countries to better understand each other and work together in an ethical manner, especially when views diverge. Learning to build a bomb is the easy - the soft - skill. Building a culture that avoids dropping it and brings divided parties to the table to champion social justice, is the hard skill. 

Understanding the past, teaching debate and dialogue, building analytical and communication skill have all been characterized as peripheral values rather than central assets. We thereby impoverish our culture, turn art into a decorative item, and fail to grasp these are core elements of our humanity. As a result, these disciplines are ‘tacked on’ or dropped from the value ratings. The putatively “hard” skill degrees or the “applied” trades are said to be what matter – suggesting you can entertain yourself with a bit of arts stuff on the side. 

I know the pendulum will swing, but we are now witnessing governments throughout the world championing development of skills-based learning, of so-called hard sciences, and offering only a lukewarm or even hostile reception of the humanities and social sciences. Then we are surprised that these assumptions about value are picked up and believed by the community at large. The U.S. offers us too many examples of the closure of art schools and small liberal arts colleges because of declining enrolments and lack of government support for the humanities.

Advertisement

If the public narrative is ambivalent towards the humanities, it is downright hostile towards the theological disciplines, often included under the aegis of humanities, especially in Catholic colleges and universities. A hallmark of our Catholic post-secondary institutions is that we are open to all, and work consciously to ensure our students excel academically and also flourish through their commitment to social justice. To suggest this is a “soft” engagement, or indeed a useless skill, is to be willfully blind to the desperate need we have both to create informed citizens with caring hearts, and intellects who understand the complexity of the world in which we live. 

I’ve been criticized for attacking or devaluing the “hard” sciences. Nothing could be further from the truth. To say that one should value and champion the arts is not to diminish the value of the other disciplines. It is to say that they have equal value, that more should be done to stop stigmatizing the humanities and social sciences, so all can flourish. It is also not to ignore the importance of art for art’s sake, which we can also forget when we strive to defend the arts with a narrow functional rationalism. We need to return to a place in our culture where we acknowledge the dynamic value of the humanities and social sciences so that the next time some inspired philanthropist funds a Chair in the Humanities, we are over-joyed and appreciative of their brilliant judgement, rather than surprised.