I dont think there are any broad foundational results, nor do I think there is a social science possible. Social systems are chaotic, and extremely multi-casua

I dont think there are any broad foundational results, nor do I think there is a social science possible. Social systems are chaotic, and extremely multi-casual, and extremely uncontrollable (in the sense of being able to isolate one cause). Under these conditions there is no scientific method. Anything called a science is just a ritualized imitation. The world does not owe us it being intelligible to us; the success of science in being able to engineer trinkets has fooled us for the past 300 years -- the vast majority of the whole of reality is unknowable -- as in, there is no method which could produce a theory of it (in the strong sense). I think apparently quantitative or "theoretical" results from social sciences are more like curios which could inspire some speculative designs for social institutions. They arent theories (as in science) by which we can engineer institutions. Treating anything in social science as more than some ancient form of zoology, that is, some local observations jotted down by an aristocrat -- is a recipe for disaster. Outside the physics lab, the entire world is an infinite zoo with no grand discernable patterns.