methodically good social sciences are the best apprpximation we have.
Yes and No. In many cases, the methodology is questionable at best and the results become a part of “settled science” which - unless you’re talking specifically to academics and researchers - is highly problematic.
Should we do nothing then? In many cases - yes. Which sort of illustrates the problem in another way - if we had nothing to say we’d just make something up right? Well, instead of doing that if we have nothing to say we run some polls or surveys and find something to say in them. That’s a huge problem. (Admittedly that’s less to do with social science than media, but the Venn diagram of the two is ugly.)
When talking about science I mean science and nothing else. Clear, good methodologies, peer reviews etc. Random street polls etc. are trash and surveys between science and street polls vary across a broad spectrum.
Yes and No. In many cases, the methodology is questionable at best and the results become a part of “settled science” which - unless you’re talking specifically to academics and researchers - is highly problematic.
Should we do nothing then? In many cases - yes. Which sort of illustrates the problem in another way - if we had nothing to say we’d just make something up right? Well, instead of doing that if we have nothing to say we run some polls or surveys and find something to say in them. That’s a huge problem. (Admittedly that’s less to do with social science than media, but the Venn diagram of the two is ugly.)
When talking about science I mean science and nothing else. Clear, good methodologies, peer reviews etc. Random street polls etc. are trash and surveys between science and street polls vary across a broad spectrum.