Follow
STEM's weakness is there's always another hidden factor or cost that wasn't considered - and this makes a BIG difference to *anything* scaled-up. What STEM misses out is proportionately effecting results (if things / costs are being ignored or have no value)
This makes STEM look better on paper or to those machine-orientated more than the reality or overview. In reality STEM is cutting out a lot of people and cutting corners from of the equations which seems to assume a lot of perfection in saying "we only care about x and y".
@freeschool
All meritocracies do this, however. It is why the liberal arts used to be one of the rare escapes.
To rank people "fairly," you have to set up tests. This produces people who take the same approach to engineering.