- #1
truthmost.com
Are social and natural sciences connected?
I would answer yes definitely!
I would answer yes definitely!
No. Why would you think that? Do you have some point to make?truthmost.com said:Are social and natural sciences connected?
I would answer yes definitely!
Social Sciences is the field of sciences concerned with the studies of the social life of human groups and individuals, including economics, geography, history, political science, psychology, social studies, and sociology.
In science, the term natural science refers to a rational approach to the study of the universe, which is understood as obeying rules or law of natural origin. The term natural science is also used to distinguish those fields that use the scientific method to study nature from the social sciences, which use the scientific method to study human behavior and society; and from the formal sciences, such as mathematics and logic, which use a different methodology.
I disagree. Science is the scientific method, so the natural sciences certainly qualify as sciences.stingray78 said:Natural sciences are not really sciences in the strict way of what science objectives are. (Read Karl popper).
stingray78 said:Natural sciences are not really sciences in the strict way of what science objectives are. (Read Karl popper). But humanities and sciences of course are connected.
vociferous said:They are connected, but the burden of evidence in social sciences such as political science, economics, or psychology is a lot lower than the burden of evidence in qualitative natural sciences such as biology and medicine, which are a lot lower than the burden of evidence in quantitative natural sciences such as physics and chemistry.
So, when you make an assertion backed up by evidence in a social science such as psychology or economics, one can assume that the rigor of the evidence and the reasoning used to support the conclusion is probably a lot lower than it would be in a natural science.
Richard Ashcroft
Professor of Bioethics, School of Law, Queen Mary, University of London
r.ashcroft@qmul.ac.uk
I am interested in the bioethical aspects of research in and applications of the neurosciences and psychiatry, and in particular at the analogies and disanalogies with genetics, issues in clinical trials, and the conceptual aspects of neuroscience explanations of behaviour. I was a participant in the UK MRC’s neuroethics workshop, and chaired the 2005 Wellcome Trust summer school on ELSI and the neurosciences.
Rachel Bell
PhD Student, BIOS, London School of Economics
r.s.bell@lse.ac.uk
www.brainselfsociety.com
My research focuses on neuroscientific accounts of offending. Taking the case study of the British Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder (DSPD) programme, and using a combination of ethnographic, interview and documentary research methods I am investigating the ways in which neuroscientific thought may be interacting with this specific environment. I aim to outline the conditions of possibility for neuroscientific thought and action about offending, to describe the extent of its emergence in the DSPD context, and the mechanisms which have shaped its uptake and development.
My studentship is part of the three year ESRC funded Brain, Self and Society project, led by Nikolas Rose.
John Bone
Lecturer in Sociology
j.bone@abdn.ac.uk
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/socsci/staff/details.php?id=29
For a few years now I have been working on a theoretical framework that integrates social theory with an understanding of human beings informed by developments in neuroscience, emerging from the ‘decade of the brain’. The resulting model acknowledges that society, and the individuals who comprise it, are products of a dialectical process of ‘co-construction’ between brain and social experience. Thus, it is recognised that social processes (at both the micro and macro level) are mediated and ‘structured’ by the inherent cognitive and emotional capacities shared by all human beings, and that individual brain development is reciprocally responsive to ongoing social experience. The model proposes various ways in which key social phenomena can be more clearly understood by going beyond conventional social theory and adopting such a perspective. An outline, ‘The Social Map and the Problem of Order’, has been published in Theory and Science 6:1 (2005), while a revised version is applied to understanding issues of national and cultural identity in ‘The Social Map: Cohesion, Conflict & National Identity, published in Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 12:3-4 (2006). For anyone who might be interested both articles are available online.
Moridin said:Well, natural sciences seek to darwinize culture, and social sciences use postmodernist thinking to turn natural sciences into a dogmatic belief system devoid of objectivity.
Nah, that sounds too pessimistic.
Evo said:No. Why would you think that? Do you have some point to make?
I hate to quote wikipedia, but whatever, this doesn't matter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sciences
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_science
DaleSpam said:Psychology uses the scientific method, so it is a science, although the predictive value of current theories is pretty limited. As far as I can tell political science and sociology don't generally use the scientific method, so I would say they are not.
changeseeker said:The difference is that while the natural sciences have forgotten about their roots in induction and focus solely on deduction now, the social sciences focus on both.
BigFairy said:I think its very important that intellectuals push their ideologies as hard as they can push them.
In saying that, the world is a set of competing "ideologies" and while there is a diversity of opinion there will be a competition similar to Darwinian Selection which ultimately "culls" the obsessed politically correct "fools" from the system.
The connection between social and natural sciences lies in the study of human behavior and its impact on the natural world. Social sciences, such as psychology and sociology, examine how humans interact with each other and society, while natural sciences, like biology and ecology, study the physical world and its processes. Both fields are essential in understanding the complex relationship between humans and the environment.
Studying the connection between social and natural sciences allows us to have a more comprehensive understanding of the world around us. It helps us recognize the impact of human behavior on the environment and how changes in nature can affect society. This knowledge is crucial in addressing global issues, such as climate change and environmental degradation.
There is a significant overlap between social and natural sciences in the study of human-environment interactions. For example, in the field of environmental psychology, researchers use both social and natural science methods to understand how the environment influences human behavior and well-being. Additionally, topics such as sustainability and conservation require an interdisciplinary approach that combines both social and natural sciences.
One example of collaboration between social and natural sciences is in the study of climate change. Social scientists examine the social, economic, and political factors that contribute to climate change and how it affects society. Natural scientists, on the other hand, study the physical processes of climate change and its impact on the environment. Together, they work towards finding solutions to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change.
Understanding the connection between social and natural sciences can benefit society in various ways. It can help us make more informed decisions about environmental policies and management strategies. It can also lead to the development of more sustainable practices and technologies that consider both human and environmental needs. Additionally, it can promote a better understanding of how human behavior and societal structures can contribute to or prevent environmental issues, leading to more effective solutions.