Here’s the thing though.
So we live in a society where decision making and analytical capabilities are delegated to the top rung, in pretty much every major organization, right? You don’t get burger flippers or even minor night managers questioning decisions made by the top because the top is correct because they know better, right?
This isn’t actually the case, though. No amount of knowledge at the top substitutes for local knowledge about the context particular to one store or another. But making decisions at that local level requires critical thinking and stuff which clearly some foolish burger flipper or night manager doesn’t have!
But there’s the issue: the skills taught in the humanities are actually key, at all levels of daily decisionmaking. It’s just that we have delegated the making of those decisions to the top. This isn’t because it’s more efficient or because we live in such an uneducated society (we have the highest level of literacy right now than in any point in history), it’s because that hierarchy is seen as legitimate.
So the humanities are in low demand because we don’t ask anyone at lower levels to think critically. And I’ll reiterate that the STEM fields are highly dependent on government funding of the sciences, which has not been forthcoming as of late. And neither I nor anyone else is denying that engineering and the hard sciences aren’t difficult disciplines. But the establishment of the kind of knowledge that the hard sciences embody over all other kinds of knowledge says more about our society than the objective value of those disciplines.