<p>
</p>
<p>No, I didn’t. To “hold” something means to “believe.” There is a difference between believing an idea and being aware that others hold that belief. I would say that the culture at Stanford is well aware of the techy-fuzzy divide. But that is not the same as them all holding that the fuzzy path is, in the words of Satz, not “serious.” I hope you see this distinction.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just because someone chooses words carefully in class doesn’t mean they always choose their words carefully. Or it could be that the report on the Senate meeting just simplified the way Satz presented it, when she did acknowledge the nuances.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well I wasn’t aware that that’s ever happened–in my four years here, I’ve never seen anyone *laugh *at someone else for their major.</p>
<p>I understand what you’re saying, Senior0991, since my class choices are also pretty evenly divided among techy/fuzzy, but my original point was that Satz seemed to oversimplify the issue, probably to prove her point about the humanities (after all, that’s what she was presenting on).</p>