3 ms·

> liberal arts-esque logic Can you expand on specifically what you meant here?

next_xibalba 4y ago
Sure. (One of my degrees is in liberal arts, so I speak from personal experience here.) Many of the fields in liberal arts pump out ideas. Think of it as theoretical physics (less all the math) without any ability/attempt to prove the ideas via rigorous evidence or experimentation. Often ideas are heavily dressed up with pseudo-technical language in an attempt to legitimize them. See also the works of: Foucault, Jung, Derrida, Freud, etc. Now, in some cases, this is no big deal. For example, producing a work of art (novel, painting, etc.) does should not have any requirements of proof, evidence, falsifiability, etc. But in other cases, where the creation of new knowledge is claimed, a lot of this stuff should be thrown on the junk heap. It does nothing to improve the plight of humanity.
- jgeada 4y ago
  Haven't you also just described Economics? (I frequently describe economics as soothsayers for the rich, telling them what they want to hear, but dressed up in technicallese and mathematics to make it appear as hard science, when it is far from it)
  - next_xibalba 4y ago
    Econ is definitely closer to psychology and sociology than it is to physics or chemistry on the "not science <--> science" spectrum. Econ is at least more quantitative and relies heavily on data (as compared to philosophy, <X> studies, etc). But obv experimentation is more difficult.
    - polka_haunts_us 4y ago
      Anecdotally, when I was taking Advanced Econometrics as an undergrad, the class was being audited by a professor in the Economics department that, in their education through PhD, had never actually learned any quantitative anaylsis. So there are definitely people out there that are getting by on the fact they can make their ideas sound good convincing enough to pass a journal's review board and a tenure committee. So yes, very much a social science.

Sure. (One of my degrees is in liberal arts, so I speak from personal experience here.) Many of the fields in liberal arts pump out ideas. Think of it as theoretical physics (less all the math) without any ability/attempt to prove the ideas via rigorous evidence or experimentation. Often ideas are heavily dressed up with pseudo-technical language in an attempt to legitimize them. See also the works of: Foucault, Jung, Derrida, Freud, etc. Now, in some cases, this is no big deal. For example, producing a work of art (novel, painting, etc.) does should not have any requirements of proof, evidence, falsifiability, etc. But in other cases, where the creation of new knowledge is claimed, a lot of this stuff should be thrown on the junk heap. It does nothing to improve the plight of humanity.

jgeada 4y ago
Haven't you also just described Economics? (I frequently describe economics as soothsayers for the rich, telling them what they want to hear, but dressed up in technicallese and mathematics to make it appear as hard science, when it is far from it)
- next_xibalba 4y ago
  Econ is definitely closer to psychology and sociology than it is to physics or chemistry on the "not science <--> science" spectrum. Econ is at least more quantitative and relies heavily on data (as compared to philosophy, <X> studies, etc). But obv experimentation is more difficult.
  - polka_haunts_us 4y ago
    Anecdotally, when I was taking Advanced Econometrics as an undergrad, the class was being audited by a professor in the Economics department that, in their education through PhD, had never actually learned any quantitative anaylsis. So there are definitely people out there that are getting by on the fact they can make their ideas sound good convincing enough to pass a journal's review board and a tenure committee. So yes, very much a social science.