3 ms·

A lot of soft "social science" (pseudoscience in my opinion) is unquestioningly defended by many because of appeal to authority, ideological, and political reas

A lot of soft "social science" (pseudoscience in my opinion) is unquestioningly defended by many because of appeal to authority, ideological, and political reasons.

claudiawerner 8y ago
In my experience, this also happens a lot with "hard science" too, and a charge against various investigations in soft science and philosophy are led by certain "appeals to authority" themselves - including and not limited to unquestioned positivism, the unsubstantiated belief in objectivity in science etc. And these are as ideological as any other "soft science" defender - only more pernicious, since such views are rarely admitted to be ideological in themselves.
- xkcd-sucks 8y ago
  Science is as much predicated in faith as any religion. (Faith that people correctly report the "truth", etc.). The congregations of, let's say, Newtonian physics may be pretty skeptical, as they can examine claims by throwing a ball around, but most modern "hard" science takes place on scales too small or large for any person to observe. That takes a lot of faith in instrumentation and models.
  - leereeves 8y ago
    The fact that your computer works is proof that our theories about very small scales are extremely accurate. You only have to depend on faith if you don't understand the math.
frenchy 8y ago
I don't want to put words in you mouth, but social science is not necessarily pseudoscience. A lot of it is, or rather, a lot of what is popularized is, because it's a lot easier to make bullshit interesting.
- a1369209993 8y ago
  > a lot of what is popularized is I think that's what they're saying; ie: (a lot of "social science") (namely the pseudoscience) is unquestioningly defended, while the minority of social (non-pseudo-) science is usually ignored because it doesn't appeal to authority, ideology, or politics.

3 ms·

A lot of soft "social science" (pseudoscience in my opinion) is unquestioningly defended by many because of appeal to authority, ideological, and political reas

by 50656E6973 8y ago

A lot of soft "social science" (pseudoscience in my opinion) is unquestioningly defended by many because of appeal to authority, ideological, and political reasons.

claudiawerner 8y ago
In my experience, this also happens a lot with "hard science" too, and a charge against various investigations in soft science and philosophy are led by certain "appeals to authority" themselves - including and not limited to unquestioned positivism, the unsubstantiated belief in objectivity in science etc. And these are as ideological as any other "soft science" defender - only more pernicious, since such views are rarely admitted to be ideological in themselves.
- xkcd-sucks 8y ago
  Science is as much predicated in faith as any religion. (Faith that people correctly report the "truth", etc.). The congregations of, let's say, Newtonian physics may be pretty skeptical, as they can examine claims by throwing a ball around, but most modern "hard" science takes place on scales too small or large for any person to observe. That takes a lot of faith in instrumentation and models.
  - leereeves 8y ago
    The fact that your computer works is proof that our theories about very small scales are extremely accurate. You only have to depend on faith if you don't understand the math.
frenchy 8y ago
I don't want to put words in you mouth, but social science is not necessarily pseudoscience. A lot of it is, or rather, a lot of what is popularized is, because it's a lot easier to make bullshit interesting.
- a1369209993 8y ago
  > a lot of what is popularized is I think that's what they're saying; ie: (a lot of "social science") (namely the pseudoscience) is unquestioningly defended, while the minority of social (non-pseudo-) science is usually ignored because it doesn't appeal to authority, ideology, or politics.