We've all met people who ask what college we went to - it's a silly question, the first time it happens (well, if you are out of college anyway) but soon you learn it is simply a segue for the questioner to tell you what college they went to.
So no matter what school you went to, they will then introduce something along the lines of 'I went to a little school in Massachusetts, perhaps you've heard of it, called (Harvard/Yale)'. Basically they want to lay the groundwork for bolstering the credibility of any future idiocy they may speak by invoking a school every has heard of. I mean, those Whiffenpoofs are famous the world over.
So it goes with creative people. In science, if someone introduces their creativity first, they are basically telling you that their emotions and desire to be just as legitimate as people with actual expertise is equivalent to some piece of paper from The Man.
Well, it isn't. If I go to a doctor, I don't want him telling me how poorly he did at math or how much he likes modern art. Anyone introducing their creativity has basically checked out of any conversation outside a humanities faculty gathering.
Weirdly, they win a lot. If I go to New York City I can be poopooed for not knowing the work of some obscure performance artist but what does that fine arts Ph.D. know about adaptive radiation or condensed matter physics? Nothing. Science does not yet equate to cultural vindication.
Scott Adams, creator of "Dilbert", however, is having none of it:
