thruster_fuel69

thruster_fuel69 t1_j24kt50 wrote

A select few don't decide the rules. A select few are raised above the rules, for some period in time, but the rules are made by us. It'd sad that we're collectively stupid enough to vote against our own interests, but that's humanity! Billions of stupid violent monkeys. Now with machine learning tools to make weapons with!

3

thruster_fuel69 t1_j1nghh4 wrote

Even if people are "honest" it's too subjective and interdependent on complex and personal dynamics that no one study will capture it properly.

I beg you to give me an example of a consistent, repeatable story that emerges from more than 2 social science studies. So far I just see you have strong opinions and love your job. That's great and all, but doesn't change my mind.

−12

thruster_fuel69 t1_j1ne3x7 wrote

Love this thread, just want to mention my general response to this is other sciences have a fundamental truth in reality that social science currently can't achieve.

Not disagreeing that all science shouldn't get salt, but I stand by saying some, like social science, deserve buckets due to their nature.

0

thruster_fuel69 t1_j1ndhl4 wrote

There's no foundational truth to it. I'm no expert but most of the studies I've seen use questionable methods. Of particular concern is anything self reported. I don't know how you escape this, beyond what is already done with statistical analysis. I just don't think it's enough to trust it as anything "true".

More like, best guesses from best subjective data we could find, most of the time. Compare that to physics or biology where there's atoms, cells, laws that hold etc. Its just not in the same league, yet people seem to think it is.

3