Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
Sociology as a field also seems obsessed with proving that nurture outweighs nature, when they should be focusing on the role of both nature and nurture in human experience. It's a field of study that is inherently politically motivated.
|
Having studied sociology, that's just not even in the ballpark of true. Most sociology is not even interested in the nurture/nature question, that's more related to fields like pedagogy or psychology.
Also, the idea even within the field of sociology people interested in this question are "trying to prove nurture outweights nature" is just patently false. Also, that's not a
political bias.
For the record though, I would agree that a lot of human sciences are BS. But that's not how they're BS.
EDIT:
Quote:
|
You're basically taking very abstract concepts, like human intelligence and personality, and attempting to quantify them.
|
Also, just no. This is basically opposite to reality.
The whole field of qualitative research was essentially invented because fields like sociology were NOT interested in quantifying things like intelligence and personality, but instead wanted to find ways to say something interesting about these topics without trying to quantify them.
EDIT2: ALso, intelligence and personality are not really sociological topics, you're talking psychology.
Sociology by definition studies groups of people.