I have really mixed feelings about this article. As someone who has had an extensively "blended" education in the sciences and the humanities I have found value to studying both. As an undergraduate studying the history of science (while also conducting scientific research in primatology) I found that my history courses and research were exceptionally useful. They helped me realize that there were intellectual traditions and that cultural thought itself evolves over time (and science is not immune to this). I became a better writer because of the humanities. I was also forced to read more history books and articles and sharpened my critical thinking skills in history. I became politically aware at a deeper level because of the humanities. I actually became a better scientist because of the humanities.

I think the main problem is with the way academia is structured. We create the division of science and the humanities. Whatever you study, whether it be physics, biology, anthropology, philosophy, history, etc. you are an academic, learning a highly technical skill and language. I feel as though all academic fields are mutually supportive and helpful to understanding the universe. I think within our current structure we often forget this and tend to privilege the disciplines that happen to produce the most immediate economic benefit. But if we all just abandon the humanities because it is hard to get a job out of it that is directly relevant, we will lose the important social critics and great philosophical thinkers that could exist in the 21st century.

I feel like the best solution to this is to ignore the boundaries set up by university. If you are just starting university, don't look at the academic silos to direct your career. Think about what you love. Would you like to learn about atoms? Would you like to learn about human evolution? Would you also like to learn about Ancient Egypt? Then take first year physics, anthropology, and history. What does it matter that these things are lumped into different broadly relevant categories? Learning about atoms does not mean that you can't learn about Ancient Egypt and vice versa. In fact, I even recommend majoring in two subjects that traditionally do not seem complementary. I feel as though if you have a diverse, non-traditional academic background you have an advantage. You can put ideas together that have never gone together before. You can do research and have a perspective that is novel and useful.

Humanities should not be relegated simply to private study. It is important that we have places that foster an interest in the human past and human thinking. We need people to study this and contribute to a deeper and richer knowledge of what it means to be human.

EDIT:

It is also important to note that many of our most important professionals have backgrounds in the humanities: lawyers, politicians, teachers, and anybody that works in the private or public sectors related to international relations/politics/business, etc.