No one is perfect becuase life itself is unperfect - Belen E. Contreras
Captain Cynic Guides
Administrative Contact
Talk Talk
Philosophy Forum
Religion Forum
Psychology Forum
Science & Technology Forum
Politics & Current Events Forum
Health & Wellness Forum
Sexuality & Intimacy Forum
Product Reviews
Stories & Poetry Forum
Art Forum
Movie/TV Reviews
Jokes & Games
Photos, Videos & Music Forum


User Thread
 35yrs • M •
A CTL of 1 means that wittgensteins is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
The physicist Richard Feymman famously questioned the credibility of the social sciences, suggesting that they deal with phenomena too complex for the theories they fashion. Is this true? Surely not. Certainly physics and say, econmics, are very different. But neither are without a basis. The natrual sciences deal with relations, or rather, in Piaget's sense, structures (series' of transformations arranged in a hierarchy and unfiied by a given principle); whereas the social sciences are conversant with fixed THINGS which are simple in the sense of being non-divisible (ie people, or a trade union) but the causal relations of which remain out of sight, and only deducible ex post facto. As Hegel said, the owl of minerva spreads its wings at dusk. We can say, things are thus; a discrete state of affairs can be picked out, with whatever details are relevant to the description; but the relations between them remain quite obscure. The difference between the two sciences, then, can be encapsulated like so: physics is an upturned pyramid, the base of which is more complex and less fundmantal; everything we infer from the top we infer from below. Sociology, on the other hand, is like a stratum of rocks, frozen in time, none being priviliged or adducible from the other.

| Permalink
 34yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that mutnuaq is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
the main problem with social sciences is that people are born with completely different minds/wiring than others which makes predictions impossible and without being able to predict anything 100% of the time you are working with something similar to astrology as apposed to astronomy.......without the ability to predict you can't say anything is fact at that point you can only speculate.

However that's just an undereducated opinion, based on the observations of an undereducated scientific community that initiated the research in the first place.

If it is a "science" it's no more of a science than philosophy was when it began...which is said to be the foundation of science however surely cannot be considered science by todays refined ideas.

It may be a good beginning and most definitely worth exploring, however it may be a road that only asks more questions. Which will open up new revelations and understandings of how things "should" work....but may never fully explain why or how.

| Permalink
About Captain Cynic
Common FAQ's
Captain Cynic Guides
Contact Us
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
General Forum Rules
Cynic Trust Levels
Administrative Contact Forum
Lost Password
General Discussion
Philosophy Forums
Psychology Forums
Health Forums
Quote Submissions
Promotions & Links
 Captain Cynic on Facebook
 Captain Cynic on Twitter
 Captain Cynic RSS Feed
 Daily Tasker
Copyright © 2011 Captain Cynic All Rights Reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy