A commentary highlighted by the headline argues that The New York Times’ magazine treatment of “how to be cultured” leaves out a major part of intellectual life: science. Based on the description and snippet, the writer frames the issue through a personal lens, saying they once saw being cultured as a mix of scientific knowledge and familiarity with literature, art, and other humanities.
The core criticism is that science appears to be missing from the publication’s view of what counts as culture. That omission matters because it suggests cultural literacy is still often defined mainly through the arts and humanities, even though science shapes how people understand the world, from everyday life to major public debates.
The piece appears to push back against the idea that a cultured person should know novels, paintings, or music but not also have a meaningful grasp of scientific ideas. In that sense, it joins a broader long-running discussion about the divide between the sciences and the humanities, and whether that split still makes sense.
At its heart, the article argues for a wider definition of culture—one that treats science not as a technical specialty outside the mainstream, but as an essential part of an educated person’s knowledge. The criticism reflects a larger concern that science is too often excluded from conversations about what it means to be well-rounded.
