Chris :
You don't exactly need to convince me of the  value of Social Science
since that is my profession. 
 
The one area so far where Social Science is close to being a science
in the sense that natural scientists use the term, is demography.
And it has literally hundreds of uses. essential for understanding  politics
as well as many other subjects  --including religion ( as in  "religions
of the world," or "religions of America" ).
 
You can also plot behaviors via social science and divine which are  good
by objective criteria, which are harmful, which have X effects or Y  
effects.
 
But all sciences, including natural sciences, have an ideological  
component.
It is inescapable. I was just reading some studies of Neurological  Science
and  was flabbergasted at the number of "liberal" scientists  trying
to prove liberal hypotheses  --no other word for it. As a result  all
kinds of obvious questions were never asked, all kinds of data
not looked for, and on and on. 
 
Don't know if neuroscience is the worst of the natural sciences
but it sometimes is really bad.
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
10/10/2011 1:34:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:

 
Social science:  it’s not an oxymoron.  Indeed, there are reasonable 
methods of studying  the human condition, all types of interpersonal 
relationships, and  organizations.  But the extraordinary numbers of 
environmental, 
social,  and organizational influences on any unit in society make it hard to 
isolate  testable variables.    
Will social  scientists ever be able to apply methods analogous to 
measuring the speed of  light?  No... but then again... those pesky  
neutrinos... 
Chris 
 
 
From:  [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]]  On Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011  2:15 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc:  [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RC] another take on the Occupy Wall  Street movement --solid 
reporting...

 
 
Social science ???   Well,  knock me over with a feather. 
 

 
Billy
 

 
----------------------------------------------------
 

 

 

 
10/10/2011 1:12:35 P.M. Pacific  Daylight Time, [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   writes:

 
This  Occupy movement is interesting from an organizational development 
point of  view.  I was equally fascinated at the early stages of the Tea  
Party.  The Tea Party also started with an odd bunch of loosely aligned  groups 
with somewhat compatible missions.  And, yes, with more than a  few wingnuts 
in the mix.  Perhaps the Occupy movement is sprinkled with  some anarchists 
like the early Tea Party was scattered with racists.   (I recall some ‘go 
back to Nigeria’ placards in an early local  march.) 
The  question is, will Occupy ever hit a critical mass when it gets quasi  
institutionalized like the Tea Party, with a Sarah Palin darling to help  
unify the disparate interests?  From a social science perspective, it  will be 
fun to watch. 
Chris   
 

 
 
From:  [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   
_[mailto:[email protected]]_ 
(mailto:[mailto:[email protected]])   On Behalf Of 
[email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) 
Sent: Monday,  October 10, 2011 1:55 PM
To: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) 
Cc:  [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
Subject: Re: [RC]  another take on the Occupy Wall Street movement --solid  
reporting...

 
 
At least three groups are now  identifiable, the labor unions in addition to
 
the Occupy Party and  #Occupy.  Also at least a few Christian  activists,
 
probably from Left-leaning  churches, but so far no reliable data about  
this.
 

 
There now have been protests in  Oregon, besides Portland, here in Eugene
 
( found out after the fact ) and  Salem.
 

 
This also reminds me of the  anti-globalization demonstrations in Seattle a 
decade  ago.
 
That also featured a coalition  including unions. But when Anarchists are  
involved
 
it spoils everything. Hence  the violence reported in NY  ( as in Seattle ) 
 and
 
property damage. The Anarchists  can never run the show or provide serious
 
leadership, even on the Left they  are often in bad odor, but they sure in 
heck
 
can ruin things for everyone  else. Take my word, this city has perhaps
 
the highest % of Anarchists of  any town in the US.
 

 
Billy
 

 
--------------------------------------------------------------
 

 

 

 
10/10/2011 12:27:07 P.M. Pacific  Daylight Time, 
[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])   writes:

Interesting  analysis.  If true, it bolsters the analogy with the Arab 
Spring,  which was seeded by educated people who felt locked out of the future. 
 
 
 


 
Makes  me worry who might play the role of the Muslim Brotherhood if they  
"win"....
 

 
E 
 
 
On  Oct 10, 2011, at 12:24 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])   
wrote:
 
 

 
Frum  Forum
 
The Tea  Party of the Left? Sort Of.
 
 
October  10th, 2011 at 1:00 pm 
_Eli Lehrer_ (http://www.frumforum.com/author/elilehrer/) 



 
More  than a few commentators and reporters have tried to brand the Occupy  
Movement as a _Tea Party of the  Left._ 
(http://www.omaha.com/article/20111010/AP/710109945)  On its surface, the 
analogy has some compelling  aspects: 
both movement emphasize rage over a rational, forward-looking  policy 
agenda. Both claim to speak for the “little guy” but are actually  populated by 
people with above average levels of education and (at least  in the case of 
the Tea Party–there are no surveys I know of that related  to the Occupy 
Movement) income. Both are also, best as I can tell,  authentic grass-roots 
movements without any sinister puppet-master behind  them. As opposing 
political forces, the two groups may well be a good  pairing. But, already, 
some 
real differences are apparent. Three stand  out: 
Tea  Party Supporters are self-interested in the macro-sense, Occupy 
supporters  are self-interested in the micro-sense: All  people involved in all 
political movements believe they are acting at  least partly in self-interest. 
The Tea Party rallies and meetings I’ve  attended have focused on “macro 
self-interest.” There’s lots of talk (much  of it ill-informed) about the 
future, the national debt, the fate of  individuals’ children, and the 
direction of the country. Personal  concerns–everything from 
I-can-barely-resist-laughing “keep the  government’s hands off of my Medicare” 
rants to 
well-informed complaints  about small business regulation–are present but 
secondary 
in my  experience. Nearly all Occupy Supporters I’ve seen interviewed, on the 
 other hand, exalt personal testimony over any macro concerns about the  
economy: “I am afraid I won’t have a job when I graduate,” “my classmates  
don’t have jobs,” “I, personally, don’t feel secure right now,” “the bank  
is foreclosing on my house,” “I am afraid my unemployment insurance will  
run out.” ... 
The  Tea Party Movement has been peaceful, the Occupy Movement appears to 
be  turning violent:  In the last two weeks, Occupy Movement efforts to close 
bridges leading to  Manhattan and The Air and Space Museum have already 
caused more  distraction and annoyance to people not involved in politics than 
the Tea  Party has the last three years. If things escalate this quickly, 
there’s a  good chance that Left-wing violence of a kind the United States hasn
’t  seen in 40 years–could well evolve out of the Occupy  Movement. 
Tea  Partiers work, Occupy Movement protesters choose not to:  Protesting,  
particularly if it’s the full-time job many Occupy protesters seem to want  
it to be, requires both resources to survive without a job, a lack of  
family members to support, and a degree of political concern. People from  the 
bottom levels of society can almost never protest full time. (This  isn’t 
necessarily an attack on the Occupy movement; just a statement of  fact. 
Reasonably well-educated working-class urban dwellers like Rosa  Parks, not 
impoverished sharecroppers from rural areas, made up the core  of the American 
Civil Rights Movement.) Tea Party events, almost always,  have taken place on 
weekends, after work, and on national holidays because  the overwhelming 
majority of non-retired Tea Party members work full  time.  If, as appears to 
be 
the case, many Occupy protesters are  college students or recent graduates, 
then their unemployment is, to some  extent, voluntary. True, it may be 
hard to find the types of jobs that  college grads think they deserve, but 
hardly anyone with a college degree  is going to be unable to find any type of 
job  particularly if they are willing to move. The presence of a large Occupy 
 movement in the Washington, D.C. area is more proof of this: the recession 
 has largely ended in the region and the two biggest suburban jurisdictions 
 (both of them more than twice the size of the District)–Fairfax County,  
Virginia (4.3 unemployment) and Montgomery County, Maryland (5.5 percent  
unemployment)–are both actually pretty close to full  employment. 
The  Occupy Movement is, in may ways, an left-wing answer to the Tea Party. 
But  it’s not the same thing.

 





 




 





-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to