The reactions by historians to that Nature paper are because we are routinely consistently told by both laypeople and too many STEM colleagues that our methods are irrelevant, nonexistent or inferior, and our fields pointless. Our institutions agree. Miss me with defending STEM in this moment.
Reactions by historians here indicate that barriers for interdiscplinary work are robust, even may reflect hostile attitudes. Although they seem more rooted in different styles of thinking and communicating, rather than ideological differences.
