That was the topic during Lundagård’s second breakfast debate.
During Wednesday morning, students and readers gathered at Athen in the AF building for a breakfast debate on the future of the humanities.
Opening up the discussions, the presenter Ida Ölmedal, editor at Lundagård, questioned the panel on the one of key issues usually presented.
“The sharpest point always made against humanities students is their lack of so called employability. Could there be too many humanities students?”
– I really don´t think so. Our main resource is our knowledge in language and it is needed when you develop any new technology for example. How could you implement any technology without the knowledge on how to make it possible for people to use it, said Daniel Dunér, researcher at the interdisciplinary Pufendorf Institute and one of the panel members. 
Together with Philip Stålhandske, writer at Lundagård and opener of discussions with his article Should the humanities be abolished?, and Angelica Kauntz, vice president of the student union at the humanities department, the discussion continued on the topic of the way to look at the value of the field in mind.
As a project to show the diversity and the possibilities that a student of humanities might get, Christoffer Ivarsson of “Project Athena” works to gather examples from alumnis in the working sphere to show the subjects value.
– You have to talk in a language that everybody accepts. The arguments that defenders of humanities studies have used before, that “knowledge for its own sake” is valuable, has been criticized and does not seem to have worked. As it is right now, we have to work in establishing another way to structure our argumentation, said Christoffer Ivarsson, another panel member.
Another way of structuring the question of the worth of humanities, is to have a look at the interdisciplinary projects running to gather researchers from different fields.
– One part that humanities scientist contribute with in those projects is our knowledge of language. But to take another example, we’ve been studying “Life in space” as a project here in Lund university. The question of for example the chemical structure isn’t the main issue there, but more the question of how you could think of humans and the value of our culture compared to other possible societies. There, the value of humanities is crucial, said David Dunér.
“But could there be a thought of implementing the humanities subject in the other fields?”, Ida Ölmedal asked.
– Many students of humanities are already taking other subjects outside their studies at our faculty. But I don’t think that it is useful to implement more of the other subjects in the humanities to make it more valuable in it self, said Angelica Kauntz.
In other countries, a structure of “liberal arts” terms for every student during their studies have been promoted as a way to increase the status of the field.
– That could be a useful way of structuring it, but I wouldn’t think that a straight implementation of the model used in other countries would work. But it is worth lobbying for this question at the political level, says Christoffer Ivarsson.
“But, why do we really need the field from the start?” a student in the audience asks the panel.
– What is the first thing that a dictator takes away? It’s the field of humanities, because of its critical scrutinizing of power. So the worth of humanities in the democratic conversation cant be mistaken, finishes David Dunér.
The next debate breakfast is held the 27:e of Febuary at Athen
