|
Let’s Connect the Dots: A Coffee Hour |
|
|
|
Join us for the 922 Noyes St, at WEDNESDAY, November 25th Social
Sciences... Are They Really Sciences? (discussion moderator:
Chris Wilmer, c.wilmer@gmail.com) What is science? This question may seem easy
to answer: everybody knows that subjects such as physics, chemistry, and
biology constitute science, while subjects such as art and music do not. But
to understand what science is, we are not merely looking for a list of the activities
that are usually called 'science'. Rather, we are asking what common feature
all the things on that list share, i.e. what it is that MAKES something a
science. For example, many think that the distinguishing feature of science
is the particular methods that scientists use to investigate the world, for
example construction of theories or experimentation. What about the "social
sciences"? Are they really sciences? For example, science often
progresses by the testing of theories. If one counterexample to the theory is
found, the theory should be refined or rejected. Yet, this often doesn't
happen in the social sciences. In economics, for example, a central tenet is
that everyone is rational, but countless experiments have demonstrated the
opposite; In principle, then, almost all economic theories should be
rejected. Obviously, this doesn't happen. In fact, one could argue that
rhetorics and power play a huge role in determining what theories in the
social sciences enjoy support and what theories do not. Given the importance of
social sciences in society and our daily lives, it's kind of scary that
personal judgment underlie so much of social
science. How confident would we be in the strength of bridges or the flying
capability of airplanes, if their design rested not on the laws of nature,
but on the politically and rhetorically fueled theories of social scientists? Come and discuss over free
coffee, ice cream and desserts, Wednesday Nov. 25th, at the Linz & Vail
coffee shop on
Club
Website: http:// |
|
|
|
|