/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9610779]

Which of these soft sciences can be turned into hard sciences? Which are unsalvageable?

>psychology
>sociology
>economics
>climatology
>computer science
>linguistics

[Anonymous No.9610810]

>>9610779
All those have multiple subfields and it depends which one you're talking about. Social psychology? Probably not. Formal linguistics? Maybe.

[Anonymous No.9610856]

>>9610779
What are hard sciences? Help the brainlets pls

[Anonymous No.9611139]

>>9610856
geology, materials science

[Anonymous No.9611258]

>>9610779
Economics is a hardcore Mathematics and Statistics 90%.
Anybody saying otherwise is a faggot.

[Anonymous No.9611275]

>>9610779
>computer science
>soft

uwut?

[Anonymous No.9611316]

>>9611275
That's the joke

[Anonymous No.9611322]

>>9610779
soft sciences are actually the exclusive domain of non-brainlets because that's where genuinely new ideas are needed. almost everything in the "hard" sciences is cleanly codified, that's why there's so much math. when you already understand the underlying principles, you're basically just doing engineering.

[Anonymous No.9611467]

>>9611258
>faggot
Why the homophobia?

[Anonymous No.9611483]

>>9610779
Computer science is already a hard science.
I think linguistics can be thrown in too as well as climatology.
Economics MAYBE but not really.
Psychology can be if it's rigorously based in the neurosciences.
Sociology is too soft to make the switch.

[Anonymous No.9612720]

Physiological psychology (biopsychology) is a hard science. Sensation and perception, behavioural responses to emotional stimuli, abnormal psychology(-ish) are within the hard sciences.

[Anonymous No.9612725]

>>9611483
Computer science varies depending on what you focus on.

You can study computer science and never touch anything scientific. You're essentially a subset of an engineering course with a focus on software. Or, you can actually focus your studies on scientific research and a more theoretical side of computer science.

[Anonymous No.9612727]

>>9610779
sociology is on it's way. It's important we distinguish between real sociology and sociology done by women and people of colour

[Anonymous No.9612728]

Psychology is the worst. Some of it is science, but literally 99% of papers are bullshit no one even reads.

[Anonymous No.9612729]

>>9610779
climatology is a hard science, it's a subset of geochemistry/environmental science
psychology and sociology will be made hard eventually but you can't just force it

[Anonymous No.9612737]

Feminist Glaciology

[Anonymous No.9612773]

>>9611258
Microeconomics is autistic funtimes with sterile abstractions
Macroeconomics is unfalsifiable, unpredictive nonsense

...if we're being generous. If we're being honest, every single macroeconomic framework to ever have a public policy heyday has been falsified one after another, partially because of the nature of the field and the impossibility of carrying out a well-designed, controlled experiment (which limits us to pure inference rather than predictive modeling,) and partially because macroeconomics is a deeply ideological thing taking "uncritically defend bourgeois rule" as its jumping off point.

Merely using math to be precise about what exactly your theory claims and having sophisticated, mathematically rigorous ways of generating your untestable inferences doesn't make it a science. The crucial difference is the possibility of experiment.

[Anonymous No.9613040]

>>9610779
>Everything needs to be studied the same way as natural science, or else it's not a """""""real""""""" science.
This board is so goddamn stupid.

[Anonymous No.9613042]

>>9611275

[Anonymous No.9613048]

>>9613042
I love the fact that you stopped shitposting walls of text because you realized your "arguments" against CS were uneducated trash.

[Anonymous No.9613051]

>>9613042
>implying I'm a CS major
I study Physics. I just hate this culture of subject elitism.

[Anonymous No.9613053]

>>9613048
>t. /g/tard

[Anonymous No.9613058]

>>9613051
It's not elitism, CS education is terrible. Especially in every American university.

[Anonymous No.9613060]

>>9612729
>climatology is a hard science
no it isn't because there are to many variables impossible to control for, it's the same issue that plagues economics

[Anonymous No.9613062]

>>9613048
>were uneducated trash

Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.9613064]

>>9610779
CS, linguistics, and econ are already partly hard sciences. All of them can be, given enough time and thought.

[Anonymous No.9613073]

>>9613053
>look at these graphs wow so education

[Anonymous No.9613076]

>>9613058
And how would you know that? CS majors at actually good universities seem to be getting good jobs and research positions.

[Anonymous No.9613089]

>>9613073
this chart is pretty accurate desu. biology gets immensely more complex the more you learn it while math stays about the same and physics gets easier.

[Anonymous No.9613092]

>>9613089
>trust me, I have PhDs in math, physics and biology
Show them, Mr. 250+ IQ.

[Anonymous No.9613093]

>>9613076
>seem to be getting good jobs

Nobody is ever talking about muh jerbs. It's always about the curriculum.

[Anonymous No.9613099]

>>9613073
>t. triggered cs major

Did saying "calculus is easy" bring back bad memories of repeatedly failing it?

[Anonymous No.9613118]

>>9612773
What exactly are your qualms with macro compared with micro? The premises are the same and everything follows from those, or are you talking about generalizing apparent empirical relations into laws? That's always done with a grain of salt and when that relation ceases to exist the laws are updated or abandoned if not salvageable

[Anonymous No.9613128]

>>9610779
Evolutionary psychology can potentially turn psychology into a hard science.

[Anonymous No.9613148]

>>9610779
>Anything that needs to call itself a science isn't really worthy of the name "science"

God damn I love some of my assholish professors

[Anonymous No.9613149]

>>9613148
>natural sciences aren't science

[Anonymous No.9613150]

>>9613060
Tell that to atmospheric Chemists. Psychology is a soft science because it's methods are ad hoc. In climate science you can extract meaning from chemical reactions, Arrhenius predicted that increased carbon dioxide levels would greatly influence the heat budget of the planet. Meanwhile Freud wanted to fuck his mother so you do to.

[Anonymous No.9613163]

>>9613092
I have a PhD in biophysics.

[Anonymous No.9613168]

>>9613148
>physical science isn't a science

[Anonymous No.9613174]

>>9613150
I said economics not psychology you mongoloid

[Anonymous No.9613177]

>>9610779
Computer science is a form of engineering and not a science.

[Anonymous No.9613199]

>>9613174
I was giving an example of why a soft science is soft. Nice argument though.

[Anonymous No.9613204]

>>9613040
t. butthurt psych major

[Anonymous No.9613206]

>>9613093
Yes, sour grape cucks like you are.

>>9613099
Oh, most certainly not, my fellow physicist. I a much able to understand epsilon-delta proofs without resorting to super-duper thin variations of x.

>>9613163
So neither biology nor physics.

[Anonymous No.9613216]

>>9613206
Not that anon but biophysics Ph.D's do require you to take grad level physics and biology courses. Plus you interact with pure physics and biology grad students on a regular basis, I have a feeling you could get a better feel then most about how the difficulty ramps for different Ph.D's.

[Anonymous No.9613256]

>tfw my own linguistics have gotten so edgy and good it scares me sometimes

[Anonymous No.9613366]

>>9612729
climatology is not even a real science