Congratulations Jeremy, you're cured!

[Junkenstein]

Ah. didnt know that. It's a perfectly good point, then.

But is actual Science getting any press covering or money? Lately all you hear is bogus science stuff. That's why i get confused on the two...

[DWarrior]

There's the LHC which is gonna be badass if it ever works.

The reason you hear of bogus stuff is it's more sensational, real Science takes a while to test results. Subscribe to Scientific Italian, or whatever you got over there, you'll probably read about some cool stuff.

[dzagama]

Originally Posted by Junkenstein

What's the difference?

The 'social sciences' are not Science; they are merely scientism.

All psychological/sociological studies are statistically flawed. The tools they use to 'prove' their theories depend on the assumption of ergodicity, which is a word no Liberal Arts student knows.

That's problematic.

Psychologists, theologists, sociologists, economists... they're all in the same boat. A bit over their heads. But I'll admit some useful maths came out of Economics. Maybe not useful for economics, but useful for mathematics.

Without a foundation of verifiable Truth, it's easy to go astray.

Having said that, I do enjoy reading the speculative literature that the psy/so department churns out in reams. I just take it with many handfuls of salt.

[dzagama]

Originally Posted by DudeEMETIB

I'm not sure what I'd change my English major to...
right now I'm thinking either Biology or Journalism.

Please pick Biology. It'll expand your mind, and you'll find it fantastic. Check out computational biology, while you're at it.

[dzagama]

Originally Posted by Junkenstein

But is actual Science getting any press covering or money? Lately all you hear is bogus science stuff. That's why i get confused on the two...

Psy/Soc departments realize their irrelevance, so they fish for grants with hype.

In the real sciences, absolutely no one takes their research seriously. I swear.

There's a pecking order: Mathematics > Physics > Engineering/Biology/Chemistry > IT/Tech

Medicine fits in there somewhere, but it's more of a technical art; not really a science, in and of itself.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by dzagama

The 'social sciences' are not Science; they are merely scientism.

All psychological/sociological studies are statistically flawed. The tools they use to 'prove' their theories depend on the assumption of ergodicity, which is a word no Liberal Arts student knows.

That's problematic.

Psychologists, theologists, sociologists, economists... they're all in the same boat. A bit over their heads. But I'll admit some useful maths came out of Economics. Maybe not useful for economics, but useful for mathematics.

Without a foundation of verifiable Truth, it's easy to go astray.

Having said that, I do enjoy reading the speculative literature that the psy/so department churns out in reams. I just take it with many handfuls of salt.

Verifiable truth? Don't you mean falsifiable theory?

Also: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu.../CargoCult.pdf (warning: pdf obviously)

[dzagama]

Originally Posted by DWarrior

Verifiable truth? Don't you mean falsifiable theory?

Also: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu.../CargoCult.pdf (warning: pdf obviously)

Well, that the scientific method. I was talking more about a mathematical foundation; formal logic, the natural numbers, set theory, and the like.

Psy/Soc don't really have anything foundational like that. They build their theories on whipped cream.

Tits!

[DudeEMETIB]

Originally Posted by dzagama

Please pick Biology. It'll expand your mind, and you'll find it fantastic. Check out computational biology, while you're at it.

I consider myself a very scientifically and logically minded person,
while at the same time, I want to be able to advance my creative side.
Which is partially why I chose English, I like literature, I like to write
I like poetry and reading...but the more I think about it, the more I definitely
am more interested in doing things in politics, rather than education.

The reason why I'm not sure between Biology and Journalism, (or perhaps something else...) is that, I'm almost certain, as much as I like Science,
I'm not going to go on any career path relating to it. Taking all those math
and science classes would be a lot of work, probably some fun too, but all for
a degree in a field I have no intention of working in. Who knows, perhaps taking a few classes will persuade me...

Journalism, while not being directly involved in politics, often reports on politics. And who knows, perhaps a career in exposing government will be just as fun as a career in government...we'll see.

I'm taking a biology class next semester.
Regretfully, I decided to make my first semester of college focused
on getting my humanities-type requirements out of the way. So
all I have is social science/literature courses.

[dzagama]

Originally Posted by DWarrior

Verifiable truth? Don't you mean falsifiable theory?

Also: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu.../CargoCult.pdf (warning: pdf obviously)

That article was fantastic, btw.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by dzagama

Well, that the scientific method. I was talking more about a mathematical foundation; formal logic, the natural numbers, set theory, and the like.

Psy/Soc don't really have anything foundational like that. They build their theories on whipped cream.

Tits!

Sure, but about the only subjects which have absolute truth are Math and Logic. Other subjects have to make do with imperfect world of observation. They only get the benefit of math once they quantify their observations. I wouldn't really call math science though. And I'm not sure that science is founded in math, I'd say it's founded in observation and uses math/logic to aid it in coming to conclusions. The two just ensure that no mistake is made from transitioning from observation to conclusion, plus with other stuff like statistics to help take measurements and whatnot.

Blah, I need to take a philosophy of science course, I'm way out of my depth here.