“Unlike physics or biology, the social sciences have not demonstrated the capacity to produce a substantial body of useful, nonobvious, and reliable predictive rules about what they study — that is, human social behavior, including the impact of proposed government programs.”
— Jim Manzi, “What Social Science Does — and Doesn’t — Know,” City Journal
18 comments
Comments are closed.
Stacy,
Paul Krugman always right, Thomas Sowelll always wrong.
Stacy,
Paul Krugman always right, Thomas Sowelll always wrong.
Stacy,
Paul Krugman always right, Thomas Sowelll always wrong.
Sure it is science, just like collecting garbage makes you a sanitation engineer.
Sure it is science, just like collecting garbage makes you a sanitation engineer.
Talking about trash, what is Krugman up to now?
Sure it is science, just like collecting garbage makes you a sanitation engineer.
Talking about trash, what is Krugman up to now?
Speaking as a social scientist, I believe that Manzi’s largely correct. All too often, social scientists allow (or desire) their research to be guided by ideology and politics. This is true in my field, psychology, and undeniably true in the fields of sociology, and economics.
At least economists are usually honest about which school of thought they belong to; psychologists and sociologists laughingly pretend to be objective.
Speaking as a social scientist, I believe that Manzi’s largely correct. All too often, social scientists allow (or desire) their research to be guided by ideology and politics. This is true in my field, psychology, and undeniably true in the fields of sociology, and economics.
At least economists are usually honest about which school of thought they belong to; psychologists and sociologists laughingly pretend to be objective.
Speaking as a social scientist, I believe that Manzi’s largely correct. All too often, social scientists allow (or desire) their research to be guided by ideology and politics. This is true in my field, psychology, and undeniably true in the fields of sociology, and economics.
At least economists are usually honest about which school of thought they belong to; psychologists and sociologists laughingly pretend to be objective.
Stacy… Another view:
Tocqueville, followed by Hayek and others, have indeed described reliable sociological models. The thing is, the Left – in full control of the Academic press – are hostile to publishing what more and more are learning via external disciplines.
It took another social science discipline – Economics – to describe human action and proclivities in reliable and predictive ways. Think Rose and Milton Friedman. Maggie Thatcher summed it so beautifully: “The facts of life are Conservative.“
Stacy… Another view:
Tocqueville, followed by Hayek and others, have indeed described reliable sociological models. The thing is, the Left – in full control of the Academic press – are hostile to publishing what more and more are learning via external disciplines.
It took another social science discipline – Economics – to describe human action and proclivities in reliable and predictive ways. Think Rose and Milton Friedman. Maggie Thatcher summed it so beautifully: “The facts of life are Conservative.“
Krugman does what a Krugman is…spill bs and claim intellectually superiority when all the evidence says otherwise. He’s that ‘guy’ on the Titanic that can’t believe it is sinking on April 15th, 1912.
Krugman does what a Krugman is…spill bs and claim intellectually superiority when all the evidence says otherwise. He’s that ‘guy’ on the Titanic that can’t believe it is sinking on April 15th, 1912.
[…] – Jim Manzi, “What Social Science Does — and Doesn’t — Know,” City Journal The Other McCain This entry was posted in 14 and tagged Isn’t, Science, Scientific, Social. Bookmark the […]
I’d say krugman is a cunt but that is insulting to womans private parts
I’d say krugman is a cunt but that is insulting to womans private parts