Are the humanities important in the field of technology? Yes, if having humanistic knowledge or basis helps us understand the customer's tastes and needs, then it can become the desired success for both the company and the customer. The central theme is based on the contribution that could be made by both authors who present their thoughts on the Degree Course in Literature and Philosophy combined with a certain degree of STEM in the Technological area. The difference between one article and another is that Edward Conard presents us with an administrative staff of companies and people who create and found companies with a high content of innovation and technology that make an unprecedented and successful economic explosion. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay While Christian Madsbjerg and Mikkel B. Rasmussen's article "We need more humanities" presents us with different types of successful people with humanities degrees and/or combined with Technology (STEM) degrees. These focus on having some relationship with customers and are successful, but unlike Edward Conard's article "We don't need more humanities", it includes other positions of the company which, although it is product focused, in a certain way relates to the needs of the client and they are successful even if they have a STEM degree with mixed humanities. In my opinion the authors of 'We Need More Degree in Humanities' present a more credible and convincing argument since it is not only concentrated in the administrative and technological area but presents a more complete and impartial argument, in the sense that it is a whole process, in the end , who decides whether one is successful both in the administrative area and in the product is the customer, the person who will have my product. But if we don't understand their needs and/or tastes we will never have a satisfied customer, due to waiting at the end of our career to understand the customer's needs when we can learn them in a field of study. Customers will decide the future of the company and their products, both can be right, but they must present all the most important areas of the company as it is just as important that it manages as that which makes the product or relates to the customer. The success of a company is that everyone can't just be one person or one department. This is called working as a team for the common good. Succeeding in our business with our customers. More sophisticated companies like Intel, Microsoft and Johnson & Johnson at the top are starting to launch major initiatives with names like "customer-centric marketing" and “deep customer understanding.” The goal of these programs is to help companies better understand the people they sell the product to, and the problem is that engineers and most designers generally create products for people whose tastes are similar to yours, this is to understand customer behavior and tastes. This must be done constantly because we must keep ourselves updated to know the customer's behaviors and tastes. This is because the customer continually changes his mind, hoping that the final product will be to his liking and taste. Every customer is different from having different tastes, opinions and visions while always demanding the best in different ways, even if they offer the same product. Both articles were published on the same date and year, July 30, 2013, but with different authors, reported in Edward Conard's article, "We Don't Need More Humanities." It is limited and updated to one area and/or only to large high-tech companies while reporting the article by Christian Madsbjerg and Mikkel B. Rasmussen 'WeNeed More Humanities Majors' has gone a little further and is much more up-to-date - up-to-date and comprehensive in information and recommends that both companies and educational institutions have combined STEM and humanities disciplines. The authors' credentials while Edward Cornard is a Harvard graduate with an MBA, author and economist. In my opinion he is an authority on the subject covered. Madsbjerg and Rasmussen, the authors of this article, are the main partners of the company Red Associates which provides consultancy to Fortune 300 companies. I think with this little information their credentials are quite credible as they are authorities in the field of business consultancy. Both articles appeared in the Washington Post on July 30, 2013. In Mr. Cornard's article, I understand that there is systematic error bias. Since all the information is directed in favor of the article and proves nothing about how we can make up for those who already have humanities in the future, you simply have to study STEM to move forward. There is no bias in Madsbjerg and Rasmussen's article. If both authors are referring to academia and research; in both articles the sources are identified and have credibility. If in my opinion, the credibility of both is extremely strong and highly competent in the field of articles. The purpose of both articles is to highlight the importance of the humanities in the field of technology, both negatively and positively. Yes, both articles try to convince the reader that there is a problem in Mr. Cornard's article, but you don't need to have a liberal arts degree if you want to be up to date with high technology, which alone can be solved studying a degree in STEM. In Madsbjerg and Rasmussen's article the opposite is true, the authors refer to the fact that they need a degree in humanities to understand customers in their different tastes or understandings about technology, they refer to both cases in STEM and humanistic. So important for authors supporting both business and academia in research and development that it should be kept in mind that STEM and humanities disciplines are essential for success in the technology field without having to retrain staff to understand the customer in his tastes and desires in technology.Mr. Cornard's article is only informative, the conclusions of Humanities are not essential in technology looking only at the technical aspect it is true but it is only true in the administrative area since it is the area to which the article and conclusions refer they would be reasonable in the senior management area. The article by Madsbjerg and Rasmussen is informative, their conclusions are based on points of view from different sectors of technology. The authors allow us to have Humanities with Technology or Technology with Humanities to combine both degrees of knowledge into one, regardless of where you work in the company, from a senior executive to a simple team programmer. They are reasonable in the short term and leave room for improvement in the long term with R&D business and education. We must remember that there are two different statements although they have in common in the Degree Course in Letters and Philosophy, discrepancy and different statements. On the one hand the article 'We don't need more humanities' argues that the degree in Literature is not necessary for the administrative area in technology, and the article 'We need more specializations in humanities' argues that the degree in Literature is essential no it doesn't matter what the technological level is, one focuses on the management degree but the other focuses on all areas of technical work, especially on service. 471-473.