tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post8271873615391439070..comments2024-02-29T03:57:00.088-05:00Comments on The Mermaid's Tale: Are there 'laws' of social science. . . . . or is this just science-envy?Anne Buchananhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09212151396672651221noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-91762510595187915042019-12-19T13:25:09.424-05:002019-12-19T13:25:09.424-05:00I'm probably less of a Wilson (and ev-psych) f...I'm probably less of a Wilson (and ev-psych) fan than you are, and I personally think his otherwise excellent book(Sociobiology) would have been better without its final chapter; but while I wouldn't argue with your list of attributes, they aren't unique to humans and (to me, at least) their assertion is largely non-human-specific, or purely sort of ad hoc (or post hoc) and descriptive and so on. I'd say they are that way in the same sense as (I think) you are asserting: making things (expletive deleted) up, post hoc, in hypersyllabic terms to give them a panache of 'science' technicality.<br /><br />Genetics can be 'soft' as well, when it goes beyond its rigorous purview (e.g., asserting about 'genes for' things like criminality, etc.), where many geneticists, or others wanting to appear to know something about genetics, try to assert, I would say, their personal view of the world and society etc.<br /><br />Then, this can lead to sociologibabble, careerist assertions mimicking deeper understanding about things simply observed.<br />And that, in turn, I think, masks the real challenge of understanding genetics and its role (or not) in the life and evolution of organisms and ecosystems.Ken Weisshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02049713123559138421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-2699638876501970512019-12-18T07:24:17.464-05:002019-12-18T07:24:17.464-05:00It seems that you would want to write extensively ...It seems that you would want to write extensively here about the writings of E.O. Wilson, and of the evolutionary psychobiologists who have come after him. People engaging socially are signalling cooperation, asserting power and dominance, seeking broader access to resources, those being mainly food and mates, establishing norms based on genetic innate values such as fairness, purity, loyalty and caring, and enforcing those norms. Genetics is hard science, and the shifting of gene frequency through evolution is a theoretical grounding that can support many disciplines. The biggest weakness I can see in social studies wanting to be sciences is they just make shit up - blast off some epistemological eruption of nonsense and expect anyone to take them seriously. That's postmodernism, critical theory - all lead to nonsensical outcomes (biological males decimating women's sports, for example) and are unable to make insightful predictions about anything.Kirk Maxeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11864529687578909475noreply@blogger.com