There are fashions even in epistemology, and the popularity of different subjects of study in higher education ebbs and flows.
When these fluctuations seem to be clustering to indicate longer term trends, that can cause anxiety about the general health of a subject or cluster of subjects.
It certainly aggravates things when politicians single out certain subject areas – typically STEM – as being “strategically important”, or actively denigrate others. When the Augar panel’s report to the government’s independent review of post-18 education questioned whether the English loan system was incentivising growth of (generally cheaper to run) classroom-based subjects it fuelled a sense that non-STEM subjects are under-appreciated, under-valued, and at risk of detrimental policy intervention. Arts and humanities subjects seem particularly subject to a narrative of embattlement, but there are active campaigns to promote the value of social sciences and STEM as well.
