Response to Slaughter Article

John Slaughter describes in his article a scenario that all universities should strive to meet: that of a truly balanced education, specifically concerning students in the science and engineering fields. He repeatedly uses the term "diversity", but not just in the politically correct use where all individuals have an opportunity to advance themselves. While he does argue for that cause as well, Slaughter's true argument is for diversity in the actual curriculum structure at universities. He flat out states "big scientific and technical problems like renewable energy, climate change and infrastructure replacement cannot be solved by math and science and engineering practice alone", in which he is correct. Modern dilemmas and phenomena are too complex to be solved with only strict knowledge of the sciences or math; instead, those tackling the problems must have a greater appreciation for the social consequences of their actions, an appreciation that can be gleaned through careful study of subjects such as philosophy, ethics, and psychology. Slaughter's point is that a diversified education is no longer optional in today's world if we wish to compete against other nations, and we as a society must ensure that our children are educated in all subjects so that their decisions are based on strong foundations of science, math, and the liberal arts. Should we be unable to meet this demand, we are warned that it will "quickly undermine the ability of our nation to continue as the preeminent leader in science and engineering."