4 ms·
> and going by the sources she reads This is the real source of the problem. Not that multiple kind of sources exist (religious, scientific, fiction work, etc.
by tasogare 5y ago
> and going by the sources she reads
This is the real source of the problem. Not that multiple kind of sources exist (religious, scientific, fiction work, etc.) but that one kind try to pass as something it is not. This is particularly pervasive in fields like sociology where political essays are masquerading as science when it is in fact not. Sooner or later reality will come back, but a lot of time and money is wasted in the process, both by universities and public policies.
- zozbot234 5y ago> This is particularly pervasive in fields like sociology where political essays are masquerading as science when it is in fact not. The "is vs. ought problem" strikes again, it seems. There are plenty of politically-motivated folks in "soft" social studies who can't quite tell the difference between talking about the world as it is, vs. what we might want it to be like. The more rigorous social sciences are a lot clearer on always striving for a clear distinction between "positive" (i.e. "descriptive") and "normative" talk.
- 13years 5y agoFurthermore, when we can not distinguish between "is vs. ought", then we have a complete lack of understanding of the world. This becomes a circular problem, in that our lack of understanding means that we propose the wrong solutions for attempting to move towards the "ought" often with many undesirable results in direct opposition to the intentions.