It is not interdisciplinary thinking in the way I have been arguing for years. It is simply cost-cutting at a time when governments and the market is deliberately* cut funding overall. Funding arguments then become arguments about deck chairs on the Titanic.
If you think this hyperbolic, consider the slow decline of thinking levels and scoping over the century, since (at least) George Orwell’s 1984 novel (1949). I have written much on this, and now there is international attention to the problem. Join us.
The concern is the loss of comprehension, the loss of interdisciplinary thinking, which prioritize economic decisions already made to the damage of the discipline of learning. Learning is for learning, not to be instrumental for any schema.
Wake up. You are already awake in the social reality, and it is only beholden to you to do what is correct and proper for full humanity, rather than the reductive thinking, the “dismal science.”
* that is, a person making a decision; a fellow human being who does not care about their fellows sufficiently and intelligently; these persons are stupid because they do not care about the future. But it is still deliberate in the intention, the intention being part of agency.
Featured Image: The Process of Learning
Neville Buch
Latest posts by Neville Buch (see all)
- Agency, Cultural Construction, and Synoptic Vision: On Matt Patterson’s Comprehensive Examination in Sociological Theory (2009) – September 20, 2026
- Human Existence, Existential Angst, and the Protestant Worldview: An Essay on Buch’s Existential Thesis – September 20, 2026
- Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto. Ciceronian Statecraft, Spinozan Toleration, and Prophetic Praxis – September 19, 2026