The Sciences and the Humanities

Tabby cat sitting on a biology textbook; caption reads "Physics cat prefers to sit on something soft."
Popular perception
The public perception of the sciences and the humanities is that they're separated by some endless gulf. The scientists work nine to five jobs, and often longer, researching cures for cancer and string theory and all sorts of boffin-y stuff, while the philosophers and classicists either really think and feel, unlike those cold scientists, or they piss around pretending to look clever, depending on your viewpoint. Scientists do things boringly; philosophers and classicists have deeper insight. And of course, scientists think the humanities are too soft, while professors of the humanities think the sciences are soulless.

Frankly, I think anyone who thinks that has a brain full of bullshit and, if they're a scientist or working in the humanities, pretty piss-poor at their job. It doesn't look like it, but both rely on the same skills of linking things together while also being able to analyse things deeply. It also doesn't look like they can help each other, but they can and do; reading Karl Popper would probably help humanities students with rigorous thought, while an understanding of the philosophy of science is very useful to anyone actually wanting to do science since it tells you about the logical framework behind trying to understand the universe. An understanding of the humanities can also help science students with linking and analysing - both important skills in any vaguely academic subject. I'm not saying that sciences and humanities are the same thing, but I am saying that they rely on the same skill set, can help each other, and that it's a damn shame to pretend they're incompatible with each other.