Comment on Anon gets philosophical
loonsun@sh.itjust.works 6 days agoI whole heartedly agree, as a social scientist it’s impossible to deny the continued evolution of ideas is as important as the evolution of methods. Its also why techniques of synthesis such as systematic reviews and meta analysis are crucial for the health of science. It’s also why I am always bothered how we tend to in popular discussions of the social sciences continue to refer back to very old rudimentary musing by founders like Freud or Yung as guides to understand a science that had evolved past time for over 100 years. I respect their work but I feel many people never look past early authors of the 19 and 20th century and try to understand modern theories.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 4 days ago
the problem is the population conception of things must be portrayed in a super simplistic narrative. and lay people think that narrative is how things work because they have no experience of the actual processes that go on in highly specialized areas of knowledge and research and such processes are entirely opaque to them.
hence why a lot of people hate science and don’t trust it, because they literally can’t understand it. the science they learn in high school is nothing like the way in which contemporary science is done. and they feel like that is a failure of science itself, that it scientific inquiry can’t be a simple as a high school physics experiment than it’s ‘wrong’.