China is a developing country. The most important difference between developing countries and developed countries is that developing countries pay attention to development and eventually become developed countries. What developed countries need is to develop and maintain their position.
Therefore, in the eyes of developing countries, science equals tools and liberal arts equals slogans. In other words, you have to make a draft to brag. Even in India where honey is confident, you have to have a template to blow it up.
According to the logic of science = tools, tools need industrialization if they want to develop, and industrialization = the process of capital gradually increasing and manpower gradually decreasing. But in the process of development, it is necessary to increase the density of manpower. For details, we can refer to the process of British industrialization and the flesh-and-blood factories produced at the beginning of China industrialization.
So this is in line with the question asked by the subject. Why is the undergraduate score of liberal arts higher than that of science?
Because the operating templates of jobs created by industrialization are similar, as long as they have finished nine-year compulsory education all the way and graduated from normal universities, this group of graduates have learned similar skills and displayed similar employment templates. Anyone can be recruited for a period of on-the-job training, or directly recruited.
You are welcome to come to the conclusion that science students are more likely to become the screws of industrialization than liberal arts students, and are more likely to adapt to the general and special jobs created by industrialization.
However, liberal arts students have not received training that is more in line with the screws of industrialization, so at present, under the background of industrialization, the employment scope is indeed not as wide as that of science students.
This is not to say that Kobe's liberal arts are superior, or that liberal arts are superior to science. This is a different opportunity caused by different historical periods and different social backgrounds. There is no fairness at all. There has never been fairness in human society, only relative fairness and no absolute fairness.
One day in the future, when we enter * * * capitalism and need to import culture from abroad, it may become that the employment scope of liberal arts is wider than that of science, and the score is lower than that of science.