Is it possible for scientists and mathematicians to understand or appreciate philosophy? Do they lack a neccessary nimbleness to discern philosophical questions or the impact of such answers? For many (most) among the "harder" sciences, philosophy shares a stage with religion, art, or fantastic child-like whimsy.

Why is this?

Mike Alder (a mathematician) explains why practicioners of hard science don’t like philosophy but discretely pursue it anyway. He offers explination to explain why scientists and mathematicians are inclined to be dismissive of the subject. Additionally, Mr. Alder explains how and why they still explore philosophy pseudonymously.

Have we forgotten how to experience the excitement that first-class literature was meant to instill? I stumbled upon this article. It's not earth shaking. The principle isn't revolutionary. The people are completely unknown to me. But it asks a question.

Can the lovesick violence of Wuthering Heights or the raw adventure of Moby Dick really make the heart beat faster?

It's a question that comparative literature student Paul Sopcak is exploring, using an intriguing mix of hard science and the arts. Who is Paul Sopcak? Does it matter? The German PhD student, studying at the University of Alberta, is researching the connection between literature and emotions in personal and moral development.

In this era of evolving awareness, a groundbreaking study resurfaces, shedding new light on the importance of workplace depression screening and enhanced treatment. Published in the esteemed Journal of the American Medical Association, this study, backed by the illustrious National Institutes of Health's National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), brings forth a poignant narrative that intertwines employee health, productivity, and employer costs.

Researchers show that even in humdrum nonpolitical decisions, liberals and conservatives literally think differently. Exploring the neurobiology of politics, scientists have found that liberals tolerate ambiguity and conflict better than conservatives because of how their brains work.

In a simple experiment reported today in the journal Nature Neuroscience, scientists at New York University and UCLA show that political orientation is related to differences in how the brain processes information. Previous psychological studies have found that conservatives tend to be more structured and persistent in their judgments whereas liberals are more open to new experiences.