Forty years ago , English was the top major at Yale . Today it 's not even in the top five . History majors there have fallen by more than half in the last decade . At Harvard , humanities majors fell from 14 % of students in 1966 to 7 % in 2010 . And it 's not just the Ivies . Every month there seems to be a new report on how liberal arts and the humanities are disappearing from American colleges and universities . Academics everywhere are asking each other anxiously what they can do to reverse the decline . But they 're asking the wrong people the wrong question . Instead of talking mainly to other elites , champions of a well-rounded liberal arts education should be speaking directly and more creatively to the public . The question they should be asking is this : Do you realize you are missing out on a golden pathway to influence and purpose ? And this : Do you realize you 're going to need us soon to rescue the United States ? This is brave talk , I know , considering that the share of students majoring in the humanities has been shrinking dramatically . The reasons are well known and seemingly unstoppable : As higher education has gotten far more expensive , parents and legislators demand better `` return on investment . '' The greater the focus on ROI , the more attention is paid to `` strategic '' fields with obvious employment prospects , like business and computer science . And the more that happens , the less interest there is in fields like English , philosophy and , as President Obama himself mockingly noted , art history . I have nothing against the STEM fields of science , technology , engineering and math . Nor do I think a business or marketing degree is inherently useless . But the rush to `` practical '' education , which has accelerated since the Great Recession , arises not so much from optimism about what science and technology can do for our country but from anxiety about falling behind in a time of severe inequality . When a society like America becomes ever more winner-takes-all , panic starts to set in . People obsess over declines in relative status . They forget why we educate children . They forget what made ( and can still make ) our country exceptional . A liberal arts education has its roots , etymologically and otherwise , in the requirements of liberty : what it takes to be a self-governing citizen rather than a slave . To be a citizen of a country like the United States you should be literate in the humanities as well as the sciences , in the arts as well as accounting . Illiteracy is risky . Willful illiteracy is civic malpractice . To disparage liberal arts , as politicians often do , is to disparage citizenship itself . And though it may seem populist to champion so-called practical fields , there 's nothing more elitist than saying that most people ca n't benefit from a liberal arts education . This is why it 's frustrating how poorly some humanities champions make their case , especially when they do so on terms set by the very marketplace that devalues them . It is true -- perhaps surprisingly -- that liberal arts majors , during their peak earning years , make more money than people who studied pre-professional fields . But I believe those who study the humanities also end up being great citizens , leaders and creators . A humanities education offers very few skills except for those that ca n't be automated . A humanities education offers very little job security except for the ability to adapt to changing circumstances . You should study history only if you 're interested in how people exercise power over one another . You should study literature only if you 're interested in understanding the motivations of your friends , family , colleagues and competitors . You should study art and art history only if you 're interested in seeing patterns others do n't or ca n't . You should study theater only if you 're interested in knowing how to read and send cues in social situations . You should study philosophy only if you 're interested in creating the explanatory frameworks within which everyone else lives . You should study music only if you 're interested in having a voice . But do n't take my word for it . Ask Barack Obama ( political science ) , Conan O'Brien ( English and history ) , Michael Lewis ( art history ) , Oprah Winfrey ( speech and drama ) , Stephen Colbert ( philosophy and theater ) , Ted Turner ( classics ) , Clarence Thomas ( English literature ) or Natalie Portman ( psychology ) . As Americans worry ever more about keeping up , whether because of inequality at home or competition from China , we should heed the example of Steve Jobs . Jobs did n't have to be one of the world 's best software coders . All he had to do was develop the vision that would attract some of the world 's most talented coders . China can manufacture all the planet 's iPhones . Americans still imagine and design them . That 's an advantage we have to cultivate in our colleges . As Jobs once said , `` technology alone is not enough -- it 's technology married with liberal arts , married with the humanities , that yields us the result that makes our heart sing . ''
Some reports say that a liberal arts education in the U.S. is losing luster . The University of California system has been ranked as one of the top 10 universities for more than 20 years by US News & World Report and other publications, but it fell to No. 2 this year He says the rush to `` practical '' majors stem from anxiety about falling behind . Liu : Just look at Steve Jobs , who valued humanities and creativity over coding .