Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!usenet
From: gsmith@garnet.berkeley.edu (Gene W. Smith)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: A Hum Domain
Keywords: Objectivism, philosophy, sci.*
Message-ID: <1990Feb6.072511.21727@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 6 Feb 90 07:25:11 GMT
References: <3284@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <3285@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <9442@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <7346@tank.uchicago.edu> <1990Feb1.005817.1786@everexn.uucp> <7402@tank.uchicago.edu> <1990Feb5.003806.13410@everexn.uucp> <SFK18C7xds13@ficc.uu.net>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator;;;;ZU44)
Reply-To: gsmith@garnet.berkeley.edu (Gene W. Smith)
Organization: Garnet Gang Gems of Wisdom, Inc.
Lines: 14
In-reply-to: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)

In article <SFK18C7xds13@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc (Peter da Silva) writes:

>How about "arts" as in "arts and humanities" or "arts and letters"?

>It's broad, appropriate, and aesthetically lightyears ahead.

  The trouble is, it's *not* appropriate. "Arts" is too narrow.
Putting philosophy and history and so forth under "arts" makes no
sense, and putting economics and the like there makes less than
no sense.
--
ucbvax!garnet!gsmith    Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
        Fifty flippant frogs / Walked by on flippered feet
    And with their slime they made the time / Unnaturally fleet.