Why Scientists Should Embrace The Liberal Arts Analysis

Science is often portrayed as the opposite of the liberal arts. Yet Skorton presents a different view in Why Scientists Should Embrace the Liberal Arts. In this essay, he tries to convince scientists, especially those who are frustrated at the public’s misunderstanding of science, that they should embrace the liberal arts. He believes the liberal arts education is necessary for scientists because it will enable scientists to communicate more appropriately to the public, which will help scientists solve world problems. By building credibility and trust and empathizing with his intended readers, Skorton effectively persuades them into embracing the liberal arts. Before Skorton actually appeals for his purpose, he first establishes his credibility as an expert in both scientific field and humanistic field. Footnotes on this essay’s website show readers that Skorton is invited to write this essay because he is an expert on topical issues in science. Apart from being a reputable scientist,
Their huge frustration of the public’s misunderstanding of science makes them feel distant from the general public, so these frustrated scientists may not have a motive to learn how to communicate to the public effectively. However, Skorton points out that the public’s lack of understanding the scientific field directly affects their work and their ability to generate knowledge and solve problems. Scientists may fail to “garner the financial and political support [they] need to carry [their work] out” if the public does not understand or appreciate their work (Skorton). By relating scientists’ own benefits, Skorton emphasizes the importance of effective communication. Therefore, scientists understand it is necessary for them to embrace the liberal arts in order to convey their work to the public efficaciously, which enables them to do their work and solve problems more