Discussion » Feedback & Suggestions » What is it about theories in the human sciences an

  • Iris Treffers
    Iris Treffers wrote:
    <p>What is it about theories in the human sciences and natural sciences that makes them convincing?</p>
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    Jargon and buzzwords. Multidisciplinary approaches. Big, expensive machines with blinking lights, arcane controls and Flash Gordon noises. White coats. Numbers.

  • Simen Wangberg

    Gravity is just a theory.

    Tides! YOU CANT EXPLAIN THOSE?!?

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    Fucking magnets.

  • Simen Wangberg

    We tried watching "Miracles" last night for the hell of it, but our pipes were clogged or something. The Internet isn't a big truck, apparently.

    You can't just dump on it!

    Anyway, Jack White recently collaborated with ICP to cover a song by Mozart about licking asses.

    So, you should probably investigate that.

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    我操

  • Simen Wangberg

    Seriously. I mean, it's one of those things that's better in your imagination; actually hearing it is kind of disappointing. But whatever. ICP, Jack White, Mozart. You can't say 2011 was a boring year for music.

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    Come the Rusty Mitt revolution wherein we of Michigan seize back Toledo (henceforth recognized as Michigan's Taiwan) and declare independence from the decadent mainland U.S.A., the Detroit Rock City proletarian vanguard consisting of Jack White and the Insane Clown Posse will be appointed as peace ambassadors to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict. With Mozart songs about analingus.

    EDIT: added Mozart and analingus

  • Simen Wangberg

    Right fucking on.

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    Did you know we actually fought a "war" with Ohio over this, and got the Upper Peninsula as a consolation prize?

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    Personally I think the entire Great Lakes region should be its own sovereign nation, but then we'd have to include the shittiest corner of Indiana. DO NOT WANT.

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    We could only be so lucky. Michiganders are just proto-Canuckistanis anyway. Watch your fucking mouth, Scooter, or Cleric Beastwood might issue a fatwa for your vile heresy.

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    Again, we could only be so lucky. Have I told you the story about how I had a threesome with Bieber and the chick from Hanson?

    (the hot one, I mean)

  • Runar Korneliussen

    lolol at the guy who wrote "fucking magnets".. putting that in my essay for sure!

  • A豆腐
    A豆腐 wrote:

    In good shops, when you buy something, there is the rule of: We will give you your money back if you are not completely satisfied
    In science, when you deal with theories, we can find something similar, the Falsifiability, the inherent testability of any scientific hypothesis. If they have it, I buy them

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    Acknowledging the bewildering mystery that is electromagnetism is not without precedent.

    Water, fire, air and dirt
    Fucking magnets, how do they work?
    And I don’t wanna talk to a scientist
    Y’all motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed.

    - Insane Clown Posse, Miracles (2009)

  • Mengmeng
    Mengmeng wrote:

    1. For human science, an idea proving plausible by statistics (pro> 90%) is a theory; whereas in natural science, it is paralogism even an idea getting 0.00..1% counterexamples.

    2. In HS, over-generalization is accused; In NS, group enthusiasm is devoted to grand unified theories.

    3. In HS, radical experiments on human beings is illegal; in NS, breakthrough can be made on any cost.

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    "In HS, radical experiments on human beings is illegal"

    Really, most kinds of interesting or useful experiments on human beings are ethically complicated.

    It would be hard to think of the Zimbardo prison experiments or the Milgram conformity experiments getting awarded grant funding after all the butthurt they caused.

    To be honest, I don't think anyone is ever convinced by social science unless it's the sort that's masquerading as something closer to the popular perception of natural science (i.e. a lot of shitty behavioral neuroscience).

    Take the "radical economics" of Freakonomics, for instance. This is not a perfect example of what I'm stammering to express, since economics isn't a natural science. But because it's popularly perceived by the ignorant masses as being highly quantitatively oriented, it tends to be erroneously thought of as a natural science by the world at large.

    Except Freakonomics isn't even economics. It's sociology conducted by a couple of Chicago economists. But the book (and later documentary) were packaged and marketed as economics.

    As a person who is very passionate about the social sciences, I should say that there is NOTHING about social scientific "theories" that makes me "convinced".

    Social scientists shouldn't convinced by anything. They study fucking people, for fuc

  • Simen Wangberg

    Your whole post accidentally?

    I'm an armchair evolutionary psychologist. No I'm not. But it makes sense to me! Our faces turn red when we're embarrassed because it acts as a signal for the rest of the tribe to avoid us!

    Beans! Eat 'em!

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:

    I think I only accidentally the part that was only the character limit.

    do what now?

  • Simen Wangberg

Please login to post a reply to this thread.

WeLiveInBeijing

WeLiveInBeijing.com is a social community for people living in or traveling to Beijing.

Powered by: Bloc