this post was submitted on 21 May 2024
1103 points (99.3% liked)

Science Memes

11086 readers
1248 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RenegadeTwister@lemmy.dbzer0.com 58 points 6 months ago (5 children)

Physics majors have every right to dunk on polisci. Too many majors throw around the word "science" to try to give their made-up voodoo legitimacy.

[–] stufkes@lemmy.world 34 points 6 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (8 children)

Political Science is the study of political systems and behaviours employing the scientific method. It's a sub field of social science and a very new one, at less than 150 years old. Political philosophy is of course much older.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago (3 children)

employing the scientific method

Really? They have control groups? Blind and A/B testing? Hypothesis that they set out to reject?

I'm sure they have methods but are they scientific?

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The answer to all your questions are

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes - Whatever goes against my political allegiances.

Yes - They all just have an n < 50.

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The issue with considering these to be anything like the 'hard sciences' is that it is impossible to even try to control for all variables. Plus, whenever sociologists, for example, make a bad prediction, they just write it off as differences in personality or some other similar thing.

God forbid they actually just falsified their hypothesis. It's important that people understand how to think about the social sciences, don't get me wrong, but they're pretty overwhelmingly ineffective for creating a proper framework for understanding the world around you.

Theories in social science and theories in hard science are totally different.

Theories in science have a shit ton of evidence behind them and haven't been falsified.

Theories in social science, on the other hand, are all in competition with each other because they all have their positive and negative aspects that make them better for application in some situations than others.

And yes I know that we still use a newtonian idea of gravity in many cases, but that's completely different as it just tends to make the math easier in practice. It's not that we actually still believe in newtonian ideas.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (10 children)

Emergence. As in when something becomes greater than the sum of it's parts. Sapience. Life. Consciousness.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=16W7c0mb-rE

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UebSfjmQNvs

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] exocrinous@startrek.website 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Hey genius, if you need experimentation in order for a field to be a real science, then explain how astronomy is a science.

[–] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Isn't one of the point of all those telescopes we built in space and on earth to prove or disprove our hypothesis regarding astronomy? Is that not experimentation?

[–] exocrinous@startrek.website 11 points 6 months ago

No, it's observation. An experiment involves manipulating an independent variable while controlling other variables. There's none of that in space, not counting the ISS and Apollo. That said, you can still test hypotheses using observation. And that's equally true in both astronomy and in social sciences.

[–] JayObey711@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

You make those claims without ever having looked into polisci studies. Not really looking to reject your own hypothesis.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world 21 points 6 months ago (5 children)

Yea computer "science"? Bitch you mean programming?

[–] frezik@midwest.social 35 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Depends. A proper computer science course is basically math with machines. At the highest level, it may have zero programming at all, and the machines in question are entirely abstract.

Software Engineering is, well, engineering (setting aside the whole debate on what makes a "real" engineer).

It used to be that universities crammed both under "computer science", and you had to look at the curriculum to figure out which one they were actually teaching. They tend to separate the two more clearly these days. Neither is really "science" in the strictest sense, but the term stuck now.

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago (4 children)

math with machines

so computer engineering?

[–] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No, the machines tend to be abstract. Such as an infinite paper tape that can manipulate symbols.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That experiment must be ludicrously expensive

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 1 points 5 months ago

This just in: theoretical physicists are not scientists.

[–] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

No, computer engineering tends to focus more on hardware. When I was doing that kind of thing in college, computer engineering did things like chip design and logic boards and so on. I had courses on DSP and VLSI, multiple assembly languages, RISC vs CISC systems, and so on. In my university, it was considered a subspecializqtion of electrical engineering, with the first two years of undergraduate study being identical.

When I switched over to CS, I was doing things like numerical analysis and software systems architecture.

Both majors used math, but CE (as an EE major) required students to go through (iirc) calculus 5, and I think that CS majors could stop at calc 3 but would end up having to do different kinds of math after that.

[–] Siethron@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

No, that's machines with math

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Think of it more like programming without electricity.

[–] yetAnotherUser@feddit.de 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's why informatics is by far the superior term. Computer science is such a boring terms anyways, you don't call maths "number science", biology "living beings science " or chemistry "atoms science" either.

[–] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

All of thoose are different. Computer science, computer engineering, software angineering and informatics are all different conceptually

[–] yetAnotherUser@feddit.de 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Accordingly, universities in continental Europe usually translate "informatics" as computer science, or sometimes information and computer science, although technical universities may translate it as computer science & engineering.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informatics

[–] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 months ago

informatics is synonymous with computer science and computing as a profession,[3] in which the central notion is transformation of information.

^From the same link. Central notion is transformation of information

Now,

Computer science is the study of computation, information, and automation.[1][2][3] Computer science spans theoretical disciplines (such as algorithms, theory of computation, and information theory) to applied disciplines (including the design and implementation of hardware and software).[4][5][6]

Also

Software engineering is an engineering approach to software development.[1][2][3] A practitioner, a software engineer, applies the engineering design process to develop software.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Donkter@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, polisci has gotten as far as the "observation" part of science and kinda has to stop there for moral reasons.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frezik@midwest.social 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

What's voodoo about political science?

[–] Frogodendron@beehaw.org 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

“Real” scientists try to put a spin on it akin to “You can’t properly hypothesise, reason or make predictions about anything based on a sample size of ~200 countries that are totally outside of your control and are very different from each other”. Few more arguments get thrown into a pot.

Doesn’t stop political scientists from mostly accurately describing things, so no harm is done here. The harm lies within pushing that opinion on general public, highlighting the that “proper” scientists don’t see any value in social “sciences”, hence contributing to public ignorance about societal problems.

And with how lousy political views of “rational”, “logical”, “critically thinking” people in STEM sometimes are, it’s awfully ironic.

Speaking as a disgruntled Russian STEM scientist who is horrified how willingly some of his collages ate Putin’s reasons for actions both against Ukraine and within Russia, including against fellow scientists (WTF, where’s professional solidarity?!).

[–] frezik@midwest.social 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

That's pretty much where I was going. What are soft sciences supposed to do when experimental methods are either impractical or unethical? Give up?

If anything, fields like physics are in a privileged position where they can do the scientific method to the letter. Acting snooty about it is simply insulting and unhelpful.

[–] exocrinous@startrek.website 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What are soft sciences supposed to do when experimental methods are either impractical or unethical?

Same thing astronomy did.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Astronomy has roughly a 400 year head start on most of these. Thousands of years if you're counting astrology (which was good observations mixed together with nonsense).

[–] exocrinous@startrek.website 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's irrelevant. Astronomy and polsci can both only test their hypotheses through observation.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

And Astronomy has had much, much longer to make those observations. They can also gather potentially millions of data points instead of five.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

All the zombies

[–] ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 6 months ago

only a self inflated STEM-oid would take a joke in the OP and use it to delegitmamize an entire field of science based on vibes

having a BA in physics doesnt make you able to disprove social sciences, dont be like bobby fischer.