“SCIENCE HAS BOMBS, and the humanities have Britney Spears” (Kershner quoted in Purvis, 2004). This amusing comment, made during a debate among professors about which discipline was superior, exemplifies the gap that exists between the humanities and the sciences. Although the debate has its roots in the Industrial Revolution, in more recent times it has been signaled by Snow's (1959; 1964) discussion outlining the dysfunctional gap that exists between cultures. Essentially Snow was critical of the breakdown in communication and understanding between the worlds of the humanities and the sciences and blamed this for many of society's unsolved problems. He was particularly critical of literary intellectuals: “This loss leads us to misinterpret the past, misjudge the present, and deny our hopes for the future. It is making it difficult or impossible for us to do good deeds.” (Snow, 1964, p.60) In the years that followed there was considerable discussion and debate on the issue and subsequent discussions about the value of the sciences and humanities for the well-being of society. For example, Leavis (Leavis & Yudkin, 1963) criticized the notion of the abyss and, vitriolously, suggested that Snow was simply a public relations “shooter” for the sciences. The topic was explored further by a pseudoscientific article published in a postmodern cultural studies journal by Sokal (1996a, 1996b), a mathematical physicist, who demonstrated that there was an acceptance of the lack of rigor in published humanistic works. There was a furor over this hoax and counter-arguments and rebuttals engaged many academics in bitter dispute, but it is not surprising that an examination of this literature reveals that the protagonists spoke... in the middle of the paper... Light and Cox (2001) point out that for academics preparing students for a place in the community, there are significant implications on learning, such as teaching professional skills. There is a common goal defined in the sciences and humanities domains and some shared disciplinary strengths: domain-specific goals fuel the process of achieving the general attributes common to all disciplines. Consequently, opportunities for faculty linking and sharing modules of work and qualifications can in some circumstances be achieved by educators working cooperatively. Beyond this, there are also opportunities for the humanities and sciences to interact with each other in terms of how such attributes are taught and supported – but this requires knowledge and skills relating to educational psychology, particularly transfer of learning..