[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 76 KB, 600x260, phdintrolling.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1671452 No.1671452 [Reply] [Original]

Humanities vs. Social Sciences

Fight!

>> No.1671458

I never knew there was a difference.

>> No.1671460

Social Science > Humanities

because social scientist use statistical data

>> No.1671472

8th grade math>Social Science > Humanities

>> No.1671485

Social Science grad here. There's no "versus". Relax.

>> No.1671486

8th grade math>kindergarten math>Social Science > Humanities

>> No.1671487

>>1671460
But isn't it smarter to just relax and make shit up completely from scratch than struggling with data to make shit up?

>> No.1671489

>>1671485
That sucks. There is a Physics vs. Chemistry.

>> No.1671493

doing nothing > Social Science and Humanities

>> No.1671494

humanities social sciences are bullshit. its not fucking science physics is science

>> No.1671513

>>1671487
>struggling with data to make shit up
that is what most scientific research is

>> No.1671534

Without historians, our species would still be hunter-gatherers getting fucked over by tigers.

>> No.1671549

>>1671534
You mean archivists.

>> No.1671584

>>1671534
History is written by the victors, half of it is bullshit made up stories. Also did historians develop spears to fend off the tigers? Are they taking us into space or curing cancer? No, history is just a useless subject.

>> No.1671607

>>1671584

>Implying that all of those inventions and discoveries wouldn't have been forgotten after the death of their inventors if no one had been there to learn and preserve that knowledge.
Trollin' trollin' trollin'.

>> No.1671610

>>1671607
See
>>1671549

>> No.1671616

>>1671610

I consider Archivists to be historians.

>> No.1671625

>>1671489
Mathematics always wins.

>> No.1671630

>>1671616
Well, at least in my country, Archivism is a special study hosted by the government for Civil Servants.
The guys majoring in history just dwell around and think about whether there was a roman well on the market place in the 2th century or not.

>> No.1671635

>>1671630
got, I meant 2nd.
sorry for that.

>> No.1671643

>>1671630

That's interesting. I meant historians in a broad sense, since being specific would sort of exclude other viable alternatives. Some historians aren't entirely useful, like the ones who spent thousands of dollars to see if an old well is buried out in the middle of nowhere.

I think the historians that preserve knowledge, teach it, and extrapolate from it are the most important in the field. It keeps the information for future generations, allows current generations to learn from it, and takes past experience to deal with current and future problems. Respectively.

What country, by the way?

>> No.1671669

>>1671643
Germany. Those bros are called "Archivare".
Teaching is done by school teachers (also a special subject to study) and university profs (now these are actually historians...but seriously, in this whole country there are maybe like 100 history profs).
The vast majority of history grads just drive taxis or something

>> No.1671708

>>1671669

Huh, that's a bit depressing. Well, I still think the field is one of the most important. Even if it's not as appreciated or desired in some countries, it's still a major reason for why we have modern civilization.

Most science involves building on the findings of others, after all.

>> No.1671717

>>1671607

I don't know what you're smoking, but up until a few hundred years ago most inventions were preserved by artisans, not historians.

>> No.1671723

>>1671708
Well, the archivism of science is done here by special archivists - they're recruted out of graduates of the science the archive is about, which kinda makes sense - how do you want to preserve something if you don't understand it?

>> No.1671739

Humanities>Social Science

I've enjoyed many works of fiction, I can't say I've enjoyed any pseudo-science.

>> No.1671744

>>1671607
>Implying knowledge just disappears with the next generation.
Have you ever heard of school?

>> No.1671746

>>1671744
Ever hear of the dark ages?

>> No.1671751

The outcome....
...no one cares.

>> No.1671826

I think we have both in Germany, as in the rest of the world, because not all archivists try to shed more light on past times and not all historians worry about preservation and accessibility of information.

Both work with information and time, but I think they are different. After getting out of school I even wish I had gotten some decent lessons in both:
- history, because we can learn so much about today and not when some rich asshole wanted to become more rich and sent some soldiers to die. Probably the most important, bust worst taught school subject everywhere. and
- archiving, because we have to deal with masses of information in school/university and nobody tells you how to make it accessible for revision.

>> No.1671857

Scientists ponder how to put a man on Mars, Social scientists ponder how to make people want to put a man on Mars.

>> No.1671870

>>1671857
Social Scientist:
>look, you could get rid of us if you built a giant spaceship...

>> No.1671885

>>1671746
That was due to religion.

>> No.1671886

>>1671885
lol

>> No.1671892

If you take away the study of art you're left with nothing but garage bands and graffiti artists.

Also, how does this make you feel?
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1869
http://www.livescience.com/health/091106-isns-music-brain.html

>> No.1671899

>>1671892
>implying art is important.

>> No.1671915

>>1671899
Implying it's not.

>> No.1671916

>>1671892
>implying garage band aren't better than those morons in music class.

>> No.1671928

>>1671915
It isn't, if we focused solely on science, mathematics and engineering we would have progressed much further as a species. Art is just a waste of time and resources.

>> No.1671937

>>1671916
that

>>1671870
LET'S DO IT!!1

>> No.1671941
File: 240 KB, 553x300, coloradosymphony.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1671941

>>1671916
Dear fucking god you guys are the most uncultured swine in existence.

No wonder you make shit threads like this. I bet you honestly believe the world would be a better place if all we ever studied for every single person were math and science.

>> No.1671947

>>1671928
Oh my fucking god you actually DO believe that?

>> No.1671948

>>1671928
>implying artists have wasted scientific potentials
>implying any significant amount of money is spent into arts
>implying he's not an aspie

>> No.1671953

>>1671941
Yes, Earth would be a far better place if we all dropped the art bullshit. Fuck culture, it is nothing more than gay tradition that just holds us back as a species.

>> No.1671957

Here, please dear lord give yourselves a little art and culture.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4kTei0XrCs

Sharing air with you makes me sick.

>> No.1671961

>>1671948
Implying you don't have Downs.

>> No.1671962

>>1671941
>implying he has high cultural standarts
>coloradosymphony.jpg
>Colorado

>> No.1671968

>>1671947
Take your art and shove it up your ass.

>> No.1671971

>>1671961
>implying I have Downs
>at least I can greentext

>> No.1671972

>>1671941

People studying social science are the ones building up the social structure to make science possible in the first place.

>> No.1671977

>>1671971
>Implying green-text is a standard for intellect.

>> No.1671991

>>1671972
Bullshit, science is a method it doesn't require your nonsense.

>> No.1671996

>>1671991

I'd like to see you do science in total anarchy.

>> No.1671998

>>1671977
>implying understanding patterns isn't

>> No.1671999

>>1671972
wrong social scientists attempt to explain why people who don't bother to crack open a math book find themselves struggling with debt on the basis of race and gender.

>> No.1672000

>>1671996
Its been done before. And at least there wouldn't be a ban on stem cell research that you social science faggots put in place.

>> No.1672006

>>1671996
what do you mean by "total anarchy"

some claim regular anarchy could sustain many aspects of a functional society

>> No.1672007

>>1671998
So you couldn't tell it was a typo? So much for your insight into humanity. Guess your poppycock study is really worthless.

>> No.1672013

>>1672000
are you talking about bioethics fags, because they belong below even social science and lumped in with the rest of the philosofags

>> No.1672017

>>1672000

As society get more advanced, science progress faster. Religion got stem-cell researched banned I might add, and only in America.

>> No.1672023

>>1672013
Actually, law fags and poli sci fags put that legislation into motion. It was the bioethics fags that saved the day.

>> No.1672026

>>1672006

Total anarchy as in a "society" in which the strongest do what he pleases because he has to power to do so.

You can't send a man to the moon in that kind of society.

>> No.1672028
File: 143 KB, 632x600, 1282286020281.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672028

>social science
>science

>> No.1672029

>>1672023
checked the news lately? It's banned again

>> No.1672035
File: 243 KB, 1486x1723, botany-for-the-artist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672035

>>1672007
>implying I am a social "scientist" or a humanist

sorry dude, just a regular folk with a soul thinking that arts are beautiful AND scientifically useful

>> No.1672036

>>1672026
And why not? Sending a person to the moon requires a rocket and capsule with life-support and not a society.

>> No.1672041

>>1672026
sure you could, if the dear leader wanted you too.

>> No.1672043

>>1672029

that must suck

also, lol @ America.

>> No.1672044

>>1672028
does anyone know the story behind this? i feel like it almost certainly cannot be real

>> No.1672049

>>1672036
it does not require life support at all, bringing him back alive does.

>> No.1672050

>>1672035
>implying there is such a thing a s soul.
>implying art is beautiful.
Nature is beautiful, art is nothing more than a failed attempt at beauty.

>> No.1672052

>>1672036

So, why didn't they do this back in the stone age? Civilisation has existed for a very short time of human existence. How come all great scientific discoveries are happening now?

>> No.1672055
File: 70 KB, 670x515, Lesson244.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672055

I remember having this talk with my sister. She study Public and Social policy in Ireland.

She continually claimed there was validity to the subject because she studied Economics and Law as part of it..

I thought this was funny, because I do Psychology and even though Psychology has neuroscience and pharmacology to support it.. Each subject relies hopelessly on immature statistical concepts.

I freely admit that what I do is an excuse for a research discipline - but considering my end goal is robotics; at least if I can't do something right I can do grunt work to keep things rolling.

She now works for a "fair-trade group" and I still lol at the hopeless idealism she spouts.

inb4 all variations of STFU&GTFO

>> No.1672056

>>1672049
That makes it even easier. Lets launch all these socialfags to the moon without life support.

>> No.1672062

>>1672050
>implying I used the word "soul" literally
>implying his opinion against all those disciples of relevant fields means shit

>> No.1672068

>>1672052
>implying the stone age is without discovery or progress.

Fuck you don't even read history and you support this humbug.

>> No.1672081

>>1672068

I said great discoveries, discoveries that requires a lot of thought and resources.

>> No.1672087

>>1672044
It's clear that the socioeconomic status of the ass raper is low and therefor he does not know that ass-raping is a bad thing, also the oppression of the west has not built him a school to understand that he will get aids from unprotected butt sex in Africa. Therefor it is incumbent upon us to work hard and send a large portion of our incomes to him and his family so that they can raise their socioeconomic status and end the cruel but raping. Also misogyny ect ect.

>> No.1672088

>>1672062
>disciples
Yeah, I agree social sciences and humanities are nothing more than religious doctrines.

>> No.1672107

>>1672052
because they lacked the scientific method as a strict rule for observing and describing phenomena. Basically they ran shit with social science precepts.

>> No.1672135

>>1672107

Scientific method... now you are venturing down the road of philosophy. Are you sure you really want to go there?

>> No.1672145

>>1672135
the scientific method is a rejection of philosophy and all it's nonsense. To pretend otherwise is social science.

>> No.1672150

>>1672145
>implying scientific method isn't a philosophy

>> No.1672162

Nice derailing into flame war.

Back to arts: There are several, of course, but art can utilize the scientific method. Basically it tries to find out more about humans, for example about views, reactions, emotions and especially expressions.
The reason it looks so random is probably because artists try to approach the human from every angle and with every tool they can think of.

Art has its own nomenclature, so if you don't understand their answer about "Why is this beautiful?", don't think that they don't stand on the shoulder of giants. There is purpose in studies and there is history, so don't knock it if you don't get it.

>> No.1672165

>>1672145

The scientific method was invented by Aristotle, one of the greatest philosophers in the history of mankind. You have no idea what you are talking about.

>> No.1672167

>>1672135
The fuck is wrong with you? There are plenty of non-philosophical inferences to why the scientific method is superior to your poppycock humanities and social science.

>> No.1672172
File: 3 KB, 99x94, durr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672172

>>1672150

>> No.1672173

>>1672150
You are a retard that doesn't know the definition of scientific method.

>> No.1672183

>>1672167

Are you for real? The scientific method is a philosophy in its own.

>> No.1672192

>>1672162
no, you fucking faggot.

Art is all bullshit. Everyone does whatever the fuck they want. Then faggots like you come along and over analyze the shit out of it and give it a meaning. I fucking hate literary criticism, and i fucking hate art

>> No.1672193

>>1672173

and so are you

>> No.1672202

What does this thread matter? Both are an unproductive, unconstructrive and utterly useless excuse for waste of space jobs. I fail to see how either has helped or developed humanity in any way.

>> No.1672203

>>1672165
Nice try, but the modern scientific method uses direct observation of phenomena (something which Aristotle railed against). Observation is the backbone of science.

>> No.1672205
File: 14 KB, 400x320, facepalm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672205

>>1672183

>> No.1672210

Can someone explain these "Versus" threads to me, because I've seen them quite alot around these parts.

I've never once heard of any "rivalry between the sciences" before I came to this place, and it all comes off as a bunch of inflexible aspie bullshit...

>> No.1672218

>>1672183
The scientific method is a rejection of the philosophies that chained humanity for centuries. To call it a philosophy is to completely miss the fucking point.

>> No.1672224
File: 36 KB, 640x480, eternal-facepalm-eternal-facepalm-facepalm-captain-pickard-demotivational-poster-1242264259.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672224

>>1672193

>> No.1672237

>>1672210
It's a vicious sort of meme. "X vs Y" threads are virtually guaranteed a shitton of posts, so people see them more and start them more. There isn't actually that strong of rivalry between disciplines, even on /sci/. It's just that the meme spreads.

>> No.1672238

>>1672224
>>1672218
>>1672205
>>1672203

The IDEA to acquire knowledge through observation, trial and error is a method, a thought, a PHILOSOPHY.

Before you ACT you must also THINK.

>> No.1672248

Definition of Philosophy

Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

>> No.1672251
File: 50 KB, 640x512, double-facepalm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672251

>>1672238

>> No.1672254

>>1672251

>has no argument

>> No.1672258

>>1672237
Even so, I can't really help but be disturbed by people saying that any one type of knowledge is worthless.

Meh, that's what I get for taking anyone on 4chan seriously.

>> No.1672267

>>1672254
>implying you are worthy of a debate.

>> No.1672282

>>1672267

>Still lacks argument, makes up excuses.

>> No.1672310

Hard science: the study of the natural world

Social science: the study of the human-created world, using the scientific method

Humanities: the study of the human-created world, without using the scientific method

All three are necessary to some degree.

And art is also quite necessary. Web design is an art. Coding is an art. Carpentry is an art. From the fonts that you read to the way your computer case looks, these are arts. When the first early human developed a way to make fire, that is an art. When they chipped flakes away from flint to make knives, that's an art. How about a world without music or movies or novels?

>> No.1672316

>>1672282
Science isn't a philosophy.
Philosophy - the academic discipline concerned with making explicit the nature and significance of ordinary and scientific beliefs and investigating the intelligibility of concepts by means of rational argument concerning their presuppositions, implications, and interrelationships; in particular, the rational investigation of the nature and structure of reality (metaphysics), the resources and limits of knowledge (epistemology), the principles and import of moral judgment (ethics), and the relationship between language and reality (semantics).
There, I'm done with you, you are a waste of my time.

>> No.1672360

>>1672316

see

>>1672248

>> No.1672370

Hitler would disagree with you all

>> No.1672374

>>1672316
The scientific method fits right into your definition.

>> No.1672383

>>1672374
we use data, not rational argument. Data can fit into a rational argument but is not itself one

>> No.1672387

>>1672310

>Hard science: the study of the natural world

>Social science: the study of the human-created world, using the scientific method

There is no difference between the natural world and the human-created world. Everything we can observe is part of the natural world by definition. The term "natural world" is used to distinguish what is observable from what isn't, such as matters of religion, philosophy, or the supernatural.

>> No.1672392

>>1672310
trolling is an art

>> No.1672394

>>1672392

Don't you mean a art?

>> No.1672399

>>1672192
I hate forcefully analyzing art as much as you do. Your criticism is valid, but must not directed at the exploring artists, but at the school system who can't introduce normal guys to the subject.

Maybe this will help you:
In the moment when psychology and/or physics can perfectly predict human expression and reaction in any situation, then art will be done. Then there will be nothing to explore.

It took me years to find this out.

>> No.1672406
File: 3 KB, 194x159, tumblr_l0d90gqsMo1qbylvso1_250.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672406

>>1672394

>> No.1672413

Trolling is a social science, therefore, social science wins.

gg

>> No.1672418

Here is a general rule of thumb. If you can reduce what you do down to a mathematical formula that can make predictions then you do science. If you do anything that cannot you don't.

>> No.1672433

>>1672310
Damn I forgot this important aspect, good you mention it.
Art bases on skills in manual labor very often, painting being one of the most obvious examples with new techniques being invented every once in a while.

Skill --> Craft --> Art

>> No.1672434

>>1672418

Sex is a science? O.o

>> No.1672590

>>1672387

So how would you define history, or economics?

>> No.1672618

>>1672590

Social sciences can still be defined as studies of a human created world- it's just that saying only physical sciences study the natural world is a bit erroneous considering that humans, and our functions, are also a part of the natural world.

>> No.1672625
File: 50 KB, 420x420, r10466_fuck this thread outta here.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1672625

>> No.1672650

>>1672590
Not him, but seen from outside economics is the study of chaotic systems at best, making it similar to describing ecosystems. At worst it's taking some data, looking for "some" pattern and extrapolating, making it hard to classify as science.

History on the other hand is about human interaction with the world (including humans), therefore observable.

>> No.1673035

art began its slow death from duchamp and finally died with modernism. i respect art from that period back when there was solid objectivity to pieces that made the masters who they were