Why do you think it was posted here, without comment, just as a simple wikipedia link? The whole point is that it is widely understood as the quintessential idea of the sciences finally overcoming the constraints enforced upon them by the obsolete humanities. The whole emphasis on the modern and technological development paints exactly that picture, tying the science/humanities dichotomy firmly into a progress narrative which necessarily means that the modern (sciences) will have to overcome (and thus leave behind) the old, i.e. the humanities.
I posted the article. I don't feel that it makes sense to say that one side of the dichotomy is superior to the other. The main point is that the dichotomy is false.
Note that the recently identified "technical middle class" in British society http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_structure_of_the_United_...
seems to capture the science side of the dichotomy. The lack of cultural capital of the technical middle class is a problem for their status, in traditional terms, whereas lack of scientific knowledge in other social groupings is not.
As Flanders and Swann put it, "One of the great problems in the world today is undoubtedly this problem of not being able to talk to scientists, because we don't understand science. They can't talk to us because they don't understand anything else, poor dears." http://www.nyanko.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fas/anotherhat_first....
I was taught Latin, badly, at a British boarding school for, but never mastered it and was 'demoted' to the woodworking class after a year. I also spent my free time in the computer room learning to program on a Commodore Pet (I still remember the number 32768 primarily because it's the start of the video memory page; vital if you're going to poke ascii values into the display page).
In later life I was made to feel ignorant by my inability with Latin, and my ability to speak C,C++,Pascal, Basic and Assembler was largely ignored or derided, even when needed.
I've always found my knowledge of woodworking and programming massively more useful (and therefore valuable) than a decent grasp of a dead language, but my more 'cultured' friends disagreed and condescended.
Now, however, I'm beginning to perceive a level of discomfort amongst my more 'cultured' friends, that while an understanding of Latin is absolutely required for an intellectual life, an understanding of javascript might be needed to. Be interesting to see where this goes.
I do not disagree. However, I have learned my lesson from previous discussions on this site, and I am quite sure that most of the upvotes-without-comments do not simply upvote because they think that this dichotomy is something to be questioned and doubted.
In retrospect, I shouldn't be so surprised that people here have chosen to read it as proclaiming Science as being superior. That doesn't stop it from being disappointing, and even a little disturbing. Many people here will become leaders of tomorrow; I hope they are able to pick up some intellectual maturity along the way.
