The traditional historian arguments against this really show the lack of rigor inherent in the social sciences, or alternatively, a self-interest bias of some s

The traditional historian arguments against this really show the lack of rigor inherent in the social sciences, or alternatively, a self-interest bias of some sort. Complaining that “humans can’t be reduced to numbers” completely misses how probabilistic analysis works. Anyone with basic statistical knowledge wouldn’t dismiss this out of hand unless someone’s ox is getting gored. I agree that it is a complex system with many variables involved, but humans aren’t magical. Their social systems likely follow patterns like any other complex system.