4 ms·

can you provide an example of a discipline that has taken a hard turn towards rejecting the scientific method?

bbor 2y ago
[flagged]
easyThrowaway 2y ago
This. Actually, I've observed the opposite way more often in EU academic circles: Humanistic studies parroting STEM quantitative approaches in fields where it's useless or even ridiculous - Think the "poetic mathematical analysis" at the beginning of Dead Poets Society.
peatmoss 2y ago
Geography, sociology, anthropology for starters. Take a read about postmodern epistemologies. See how many papers draw on "pure theory". I even saw this in my required coursework prior to dropping out of a PhD in urban planning.
- greentxt 2y ago
  [flagged]
- AlotOfReading 2y ago
  The parent post talks about "recent years". Postmodernism being in any way dominant hasn't been a thing (in American universities) since the late 80s or maybe early 90s. The common approach these days is theoretical pluralism.
- felixgallo 2y ago
  can you point to a specific example of a geography program turning away from the scientific method? I've seen postmodernism and deconstructivism applied to architecture and rhetoric, but as convoluted and ultimately non-explanatory as I found them, they were still based in the formal ideas of cause and effect, and experimental approaches to theories.
  - peatmoss 2y ago
    Without diving into my personal experiences with a specific department, I invite you to take a look at google scholar for peer reviewed publications grounded in theory approaches such as queer theory and critical theory in geographic studies: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=queer+theory+critical+theory+geography&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=que... Also please note that me calling these theories non-scientific is not a colloquial dig at them. I'm speaking precisely that the literature contributing to these theories explicitly and frequently opposes the scientific method as a tool of oppression. Even though I believe in (bounded) rationality, I do agree with this viewpoint in part. Science, as practiced by fallible humans, can be used for bad things! But, where I disagree with critical theory and its children, is that this somehow delegitimizes scientific epistemology. A specific publication I remember reading years ago as an assigned reading cites, as a limitation of the paper their use of the Cartesian plane in mapping, as the Cartesian plane is incompatible with queer theory: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00045600701734042 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/000456007017340...
    - felixgallo 2y ago
      the existence of a couple of papers that some people got published doesn't meet the bar of a discipline turning against the scientific method. Could you please try again?
      - peatmoss 2y ago
        Did you bother to click the google scholar link? Several dozen pages of results that fit the mold and you call it "a couple of papers"? I don't want to assume you are trolling, but seriously.
        felixgallo 2y ago
        your link was simply for a google search for 'queer theory critical theory geography'. Because 'geography' is an overloaded word that both refers to a formal discipline about the physical world (mapping, terrain, elevation, boundaries, borders, GIS) and also the concept of exploratory investigation in analytical thinking, the search finds a lot of earnest cases of people talking about the concepts of gender, some cases about whether geography-as-a-subject is over-fixated on imperial origin, and to my counting, zero cases of geography as a discipline abandoning the scientific method. So your initial assertion remains unconvincing. Please feel free to name a specific department if that helps. It's easy to make fun of some of the overwrought academic papers that are out there. Nevertheless if you're a huge fan of the scientific method and rigorous thinking, as you seem to claim that you are, then making your own overwrought and specious claims about the issue is not a way to solve the problem.
glitchc 2y ago
Psychology.
- immibis 2y ago
  Please elaborate.
xdennis 2y ago
I first learned about this from Richard Dawkins, but apparently there's a push to consider Maori mythology as science: https://richarddawkins.net/2021/12/myths-do-not-belong-in-science-classes-letter-to-the-royal-society-of-new-zealand/ https://richarddawkins.net/2021/12/myths-do-not-belong-in-sc...
- harimau777 2y ago
  Are you referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81tauranga_M%C4%81ori https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81tauranga_M%C4%81ori If so, then it seems to me that there's much more nuance than "mythology as science". Certainly there are aspects of traditional knowledge that deal directly with facts and therefore could be in conflict with science. However, that's not the same as recognizing that different cultures can have different ways of understanding and thinking about the world. Understanding those different ways of understanding could be a valuable tool in allowing society to develop creative approaches to problems.
- UncleMeat 2y ago
  Science did not spring forth like athena from zeus' head. In their historical context, tools that we would now consider to be wildly unscientific (like oracles to gods or various alchemical practices) were intertwined deeply with scientific practice. It is not unreasonable to draw these kinds of connections in research. I know some people doing interesting work connecting ancient cipher technology with various divination techniques. Just because these techniques don't work doesn't mean that they aren't relevant to understanding why things are the way they are today.

bbor 2y ago

[flagged]

This. Actually, I've observed the opposite way more often in EU academic circles: Humanistic studies parroting STEM quantitative approaches in fields where it's useless or even ridiculous - Think the "poetic mathematical analysis" at the beginning of Dead Poets Society.

peatmoss 2y ago

Geography, sociology, anthropology for starters. Take a read about postmodern epistemologies. See how many papers draw on "pure theory". I even saw this in my required coursework prior to dropping out of a PhD in urban planning.

greentxt 2y ago
[flagged]
AlotOfReading 2y ago
The parent post talks about "recent years". Postmodernism being in any way dominant hasn't been a thing (in American universities) since the late 80s or maybe early 90s. The common approach these days is theoretical pluralism.
felixgallo 2y ago
can you point to a specific example of a geography program turning away from the scientific method? I've seen postmodernism and deconstructivism applied to architecture and rhetoric, but as convoluted and ultimately non-explanatory as I found them, they were still based in the formal ideas of cause and effect, and experimental approaches to theories.
- peatmoss 2y ago
  Without diving into my personal experiences with a specific department, I invite you to take a look at google scholar for peer reviewed publications grounded in theory approaches such as queer theory and critical theory in geographic studies: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=queer+theory+critical+theory+geography&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=que... Also please note that me calling these theories non-scientific is not a colloquial dig at them. I'm speaking precisely that the literature contributing to these theories explicitly and frequently opposes the scientific method as a tool of oppression. Even though I believe in (bounded) rationality, I do agree with this viewpoint in part. Science, as practiced by fallible humans, can be used for bad things! But, where I disagree with critical theory and its children, is that this somehow delegitimizes scientific epistemology. A specific publication I remember reading years ago as an assigned reading cites, as a limitation of the paper their use of the Cartesian plane in mapping, as the Cartesian plane is incompatible with queer theory: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00045600701734042 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/000456007017340...
  - felixgallo 2y ago
    the existence of a couple of papers that some people got published doesn't meet the bar of a discipline turning against the scientific method. Could you please try again?
    - peatmoss 2y ago
      Did you bother to click the google scholar link? Several dozen pages of results that fit the mold and you call it "a couple of papers"? I don't want to assume you are trolling, but seriously.
      - felixgallo 2y ago
        your link was simply for a google search for 'queer theory critical theory geography'. Because 'geography' is an overloaded word that both refers to a formal discipline about the physical world (mapping, terrain, elevation, boundaries, borders, GIS) and also the concept of exploratory investigation in analytical thinking, the search finds a lot of earnest cases of people talking about the concepts of gender, some cases about whether geography-as-a-subject is over-fixated on imperial origin, and to my counting, zero cases of geography as a discipline abandoning the scientific method. So your initial assertion remains unconvincing. Please feel free to name a specific department if that helps. It's easy to make fun of some of the overwrought academic papers that are out there. Nevertheless if you're a huge fan of the scientific method and rigorous thinking, as you seem to claim that you are, then making your own overwrought and specious claims about the issue is not a way to solve the problem.

glitchc 2y ago

Psychology.

immibis 2y ago
Please elaborate.

xdennis 2y ago

I first learned about this from Richard Dawkins, but apparently there's a push to consider Maori mythology as science: https://richarddawkins.net/2021/12/myths-do-not-belong-in-science-classes-letter-to-the-royal-society-of-new-zealand/ https://richarddawkins.net/2021/12/myths-do-not-belong-in-sc...

harimau777 2y ago
Are you referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81tauranga_M%C4%81ori https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81tauranga_M%C4%81ori If so, then it seems to me that there's much more nuance than "mythology as science". Certainly there are aspects of traditional knowledge that deal directly with facts and therefore could be in conflict with science. However, that's not the same as recognizing that different cultures can have different ways of understanding and thinking about the world. Understanding those different ways of understanding could be a valuable tool in allowing society to develop creative approaches to problems.
UncleMeat 2y ago
Science did not spring forth like athena from zeus' head. In their historical context, tools that we would now consider to be wildly unscientific (like oracles to gods or various alchemical practices) were intertwined deeply with scientific practice. It is not unreasonable to draw these kinds of connections in research. I know some people doing interesting work connecting ancient cipher technology with various divination techniques. Just because these techniques don't work doesn't mean that they aren't relevant to understanding why things are the way they are today.