Being scientific/logical: can you ever go too far?

[XPViking]

Right here.

http://www.faithpopcorn.com/index.html

XPViking

[lgot]

Even so, how would you be able to objectively predict the development of something like language? Did any of these linguistic "scientists" successfully predict the rise of the butchery of the English language that is Ebonics?

Linguistics is not my area, so I can not give you a good answer. I suppose yeah.
Sometimes your talking about prediction make me think about future prediction by a fortuneteller... ^^ odd...

Well, in this I am with Darth Wong, What define Science is the obedience to the Scietific Method. If it is being used, the person is trying to make Science.
Next step then to me is that my trust in the scietific method tell me that It must be able to analyze the human society. Therefore it must work to do Social Sciences yes. There may still need to work more with that and there may be a lot of morons who have no ideia of what science is calling themselves scientists, yes. But I believe enventually this will be cleaned up .

But if the question is the need of prediction of a result. There is a lot of sittuations that a Social Science have made predictions and some that were correct. Economic Science do that a lot. I remember that old Economic Minister of Brazil, Simmonsen (old guard economist, very respected in the academic field) before the Oil Crisis, made a very accurate analyses of the economic politics of Brazil then and the outcome. He was quite correct in the analyze. The brazilian previous president ,Fernando Henrique, a socilogist, published a analyze of brazilian society. In there he pointed out a guideline for someone to became president after the Militar Regime. (He did not just pointed, he gave the reasons, the process in his study, etc). He basically used those guidelines to be elected (with great success, two elections). I would say he tested his theories himself...

What kind of predictions could you make about communication beyond "they'll like it" or "they won't like it"?

Code: Select all

Sounds like you are talking about Adversting ? (You actually collect data, informaiton, etc to work with any publicitary campaing).
But that is not science, its more a technique that is used.
The Social Communication Science does not usually ask about tastes ^^ But if get Walter Benjamin for example, you will see that his theory about the effects of the art and copy do not fail when you use his theory to make a analyze of actuall hollywood model. (A side note, the study of Mass Communication have less than 100 year and they got a development exactly because they noticed the notion, the old theory did not worked to predict well the behaviador of the public and how the message affected them).

About History...I remember people talking about the formation of european's Social-Democracy style back in the 50's and 60's already. The Globalism of the 90 was already discussed in the 80's...sometimes things just do not have the right name, sometimes people is just not aware of what exactly they are talking.
The problem of most social sciences is that it mix too easily with political tendencies. Even if the scientist itself does not , those who use it does. And they keep alive controversies that should be put apart just of the sake of protection of the political ideals. It blew up with objetivity among many of the people who study and teach it in many universities (at least here in Brazil and I suppose, it is not different everywhere). 

[XPViking]

The study of art and literature can lend insights into a culture - Red Imperator

Exactly. Consider Grand Admiral Thrawn.

The act of making art and literature into a formalized field of study is self-indulgent. - Darth Wong

Perhaps, but certainly people would eventually classify art and literature, if nothing else for the ease of trying to understand it. Note, I'm not saying that the act of classifying is indicitive of a person being scientific.

If the scientific method is being employed, then it's a science. - Darth Wong

Agreed. I think you mentioned it someone, either here or on your home page, that people who are in the Humanities shouldn't pass themselves off as scientists because for the simple fact that many of them lack the training and knowledge of the scientific method.

XPViking

[The_Nice_Guy]

History? Predictions?

I think we need Hari Seldon.

Once history and psychology can be nailed down with mathematical models with high degrees of prediction, maybe then they can be claimed to be sciences.

The Nice Guy

[Drewcifer]

Ice skating is easy. Anyone can accelerate to prodigious speed with minimal practice. It's controlled stops that are tricky: something you would probably discover only when hurtling toward an obstacle.

Anyone with a sense of balance, of which I am sorely lacking in
Roller coasters make me sick, and not from fear; my inner ear goes nuts and it's "reverse engines!" time.

[Darth Servo]

Anyone with a sense of balance, of which I am sorely lacking in
Roller coasters make me sick, and not from fear; my inner ear goes nuts and it's "reverse engines!" time.

Perhaps you should see a doctor about that?

[Zoink]

Poetry and literature, however, are luxuries, not necessities. Star Wars does not change this rule; it is also a luxury.

But luxuries can be usefull. Especially since they contain so much of our history.

Being well versed in literature can help you achieve your goals in the society that exists now. I don't think anyone is trying to make a dilemna where we are forced to choose between the existance of literature and technological innovation (ie belittle science).

Someone who skips english class after grade 6 (grade 7 is where I started to write real essays and actual analysis of text) might not have as many tools/skills to achieve the goals they want.

------

PS. Star Wars may be a luxury, but what about must-see-TV? Its must-see!

[Durandal]

Poetry and literature, however, are luxuries, not necessities. Star Wars does not change this rule; it is also a luxury.

But luxuries can be usefull. Especially since they contain so much of our history.

Being well versed in literature can help you achieve your goals in the society that exists now. I don't think anyone is trying to make a dilemna where we are forced to choose between the existance of literature and technological innovation (ie belittle science).

Someone who skips english class after grade 6 (grade 7 is where I started to write real essays and actual analysis of text) might not have as many tools/skills to achieve the goals they want.

I think Mike's talking about stadying literature, like people who devote their lives to studying Shakespeare for some reason. Only a moron would argue that literacy and good essay-writing skills are a luxury. They are most certainly necessities.

[Drewcifer]

Anyone with a sense of balance, of which I am sorely lacking in
Roller coasters make me sick, and not from fear; my inner ear goes nuts and it's "reverse engines!" time.

Perhaps you should see a doctor about that?

Never felt the need; it doesn't affect my daily life in any way. I have exquisite hearing, I ride a bike just fine, flying (rarely) bothers me, and I can read in the car (when someone else is driving ). My sense of balance has never worsened in my life, and if I do feel a little queasy on a plane, I can usually 'Zen out' and 'ride the snake', so I don't get sick. My mom is terribly susceptible to motion sickness, and my dad is the world's biggest klutz so I guess I've just never felt the need to spend a fortune on tests to have a doctor tell me, "well son, your inner ear is fucked up a little, sorry, bad genetic luck."

[Durandal]

Anyone with a sense of balance, of which I am sorely lacking in
Roller coasters make me sick, and not from fear; my inner ear goes nuts and it's "reverse engines!" time.

Perhaps you should see a doctor about that?

The doctor would likely tell him not to ride roller coasters.

[EmperorChrostas the Cruel]

There is a definite tangable benifit of "The Arts."
To expand the economy.
Cars and houses are fine, but I can pump much money into the economy by entertaining my self.

I am also mindful of the song "Hemispheres", by the band Rush.
Quality of life is very important, provided QUANTITY is there first.
Without recreation, and motivation, productivity falls.

Without luxery goods to spend money on, people wouldn't work as hard.

The operative word here, is LUXERY.

We are now so productive, that if we stop buying, the economy will tank.

[Rathark]

I heard about one guy (real guy, not made up) who got accepted to CalTech. Apparently he was so good, CalTech offered to pay his WHOLE tuition during his entire stay there. So he went.

This guy is a genius. His school had a robotics team where they built robots that competed in tournaments and he wrote the entire software for that robot by himself and played a major role in the robot's actual design. That robot went on to win many competitions.

However, apparently in some kind of interview, he said something like, "Poetry, literature, and history are useless. Why study them?"


Comments? Is there a point where one can become too "scientific"?

No matter how high his IQ is, this guy strikes me as merely a very fast number cruncher. If he doesn't understand the significance of literature, then he is less likely to be the next Einstein or Feynman (who, incedentally, had an unremarkable IQ by academic standards - 120-130 range). Of course, I could be wrong, since his love of competition is obviously a strong motivation. Perhaps he should open his mind (if possible) and acknowledge literature as every bit as important as what he is doing - after all, many writers also have a strong competitive spirit.