4 ms·
When you branch of from real sciences, defining a lower of bar of quality, unable to meet the standard of the established field. Also if you branched off of so
by chmod775 3y ago
When you branch of from real sciences, defining a lower of bar of quality, unable to meet the standard of the established field.
Also if you branched off of social sciences some time ago and you never bothered to implement reproducibility reforms.
That's not to say all papers of such a science are garbage, just most will be, since not only is the bar for acceptance lower, those sciences also attract people who are unable to meet the standards of other fields.
- throw0101c 3y ago> When you branch of from real sciences, defining a lower of bar of quality, unable to meet the standard of the established field. But you are starting at "real science" here without defining it and saying the 'branches' are lower than said 'real' science.
- chmod775 3y agoThe first criteria doesn't apply to economics much, it being a field as old as civilization itself, but the second one absolutely does. With that first sentence I was mostly taking aim at whatever newly made up junk degrees we have right now.
- RandomLensman 3y agoFeels like everything other than theology is really just junk science, isn't it? After all, that is what universities were largely created for to start with.
- chmod775 3y agoYou're ignoring the qualifier in that sentence.
- RandomLensman 3y agoI am not. Not sure CS or physics can meet the quality bar of theology - Thomas Aquinas put the bar pretty high early on.
- SantalBlush 3y agoThis description is vague and has little substance.