[Timbit]

Originally Posted by sixpakistan

You accepted it and acknowledged it .. there was no "probably" at the time. The inescapable conclusion is that if a rise in oxytocin means a rise in nurturing behavior, higher levels of oxytocin will result in a higher tendency toward nurturing behavior.

What? Men have larger brains by weight than women.

Whatever. I'm awesome, masha'Allah. The more of me there is, the better.

I don't agree with your conclusion.

Khair... I'm going to read that book and ask my profs and stuff about all of your assertions. Alright? Perhaps we can continue this discussion then.

If what you're saying is true, then it's still okay 'cause there is such a thing as difference feminism.

[the_wrong_guy]

Originally Posted by Timbit

Clearly, you guys don't have backgrounds in social science.

I have a science+social science+relgious studies background.

Do you seriously think social sciences are agenda-free? I think you need to refer back to your professors on that too.

[dreamdeferred]

Originally Posted by the_wrong_guy

I have a science+social science+relgious studies background.

Do you seriously think social sciences are agenda-free? I think you need to refer back to your professors on that too.

Yeah....there is widespread agreement within the social sciences that they are subject to conceptual frameworks to the same extent as the "hard" sciences (if not more so).

This is accepted rather widely.....I've never seen a serious denial of this post-Thomas Kuhn, Michael Polyani et al

EDIT: Now my sentences actually make sense.......sah-weet!!

[Timbit]

Originally Posted by the_wrong_guy

I have a science+social science+relgious studies background.

Do you seriously think social sciences are agenda-free? I think you need to refer back to your professors on that too.

Most everybody has an agenda (especially in the era of corporate sponsorship ).

I just don't think it's easier to get away with bias in the social sciences. Just the opposite, actually. Bias is seen as something very, very negative and the view is that it can and should be avoided. Social scientists limit their bias. Or acknowledge it, at the very least. Plus, peer-review is a process which is also used in disciplines of social science. Material published in scholarly journals is subject to it.

Standpoint feminists would say that historically, the social sciences have been biased in favour of men too.

[the_wrong_guy]

Originally Posted by dreamdeferred

Yeah....there is widespread agreement within the social sciences that they are subject to conceptual frameworks to the same extent as the "hard" sciences (if not more so).

This is accepted rather widely.....I've never seen a serious denial of this post-Thomas Kuhn, Michael Polyani et al

EDIT: Now my sentences actually make sense.......sah-weet!!

Conceptual frameworks (such as Method) do not provide a neutral resource through which we can access a "pristine" reality. I think the element of conjecture is slightly stronger in social research.

[the_wrong_guy]

Originally Posted by Timbit

Most everybody has an agenda (especially in the era of corporate sponsorship ).

I just don't think it's easier to get away with bias in the social sciences. Just the opposite, actually. Bias is seen as something very, very negative and the view is that it can and should be avoided. Social scientists limit their bias. Or acknowledge it, at the very least. Plus, peer-review is a process which is also used in disciplines of social science. Material published in scholarly journals is subject to it.

Standpoint feminists would say that historically, the social sciences have been biased in favour of men too.

Except for the bolded part, I agree with the rest of your post.

To give an example, I find a significant part of (modern as well as postmodern) research in the field of Anthropology to be motivated by agendas. Also, the re-emergence of structures in post-humanist social theory indicates that in spite of conceptual frameworks, widely accepted positions in social science are questioned time and again.

This happens a lot less in the "hard" sciences, where there's less room for assumptions and conjecture.

[dreamdeferred]

Originally Posted by the_wrong_guy

Conceptual frameworks (such as Method) do not provide a neutral resource through which we can access a "pristine" reality.

Agreed.

I think the element of conjecture is slightly stronger in social research.

It probably is......I shouldn't have said "if not more so"....because as Timbit noted social scientists tend to check for bias quite rigorously from research design to conclusion.

[Timbit]

I don't know what you're talking about, bro. Seriously. Anthropologists are the least biased people ever. I mean, they really, really have to keep their bias in check.
We're not talking Lewis Henry Morgan anymore, you know?

[fiahmad]

I think of all chores I hate ironing the most. I might invest in a Tobi steamer.


.

[dreamdeferred]

Originally Posted by Timbit

I don't know what you're talking about, bro. Seriously. Anthropologists are the least biased people ever. I mean, they really, really have to keep their bias in check.
We're not talking Lewis Henry Morgan anymore, you know?

I don't get it.......on what grounds are you denying the notion of bias in social sciences? There are epistemological biases, missing values, selection biases, data biases and the corresponding problems building complete datasets from multiple sources.

There's no question at all that social sciences are subject to bias.

[Timbit]

Originally Posted by dreamdeferred

I don't get it.......on what grounds are you denying the notion of bias in social sciences? There are epistemological biases, missing values, selection biases, data biases and the corresponding problems building complete datasets from multiple sources.

There's no question at all that social sciences are subject to bias.

I never denied that there's bias in social science. Every discipline is subject to bias.

But it's a problem that social scientists deal with pretty well, I think. Especially anthropologists.

[dreamdeferred]

Originally Posted by Timbit

I never denied that there's bias in social science. Every discipline is subject to bias.

But it's a problem that social scientists deal with pretty well, I think. Especially anthropologists.

Oh.....'cause I got the impression that you believe social sciences (especially anthropology) are much less biased than "hard" sciences....which is a pretty subjective interpretation that exposes your bias so to speak

[the_wrong_guy]

Originally Posted by Timbit

I don't know what you're talking about, bro. Seriously. Anthropologists are the least biased people ever. I mean, they really, really have to keep their bias in check.
We're not talking Lewis Henry Morgan anymore, you know?

I qualified my sentence with ["b]a significant part[/b]."

You really must go through some of the studies done on Indian Muslim societies. In India, Madrasas have been severely misrepresented and unjustly portrayed by various socio-cultural anthroplogists in their studies.

I had a professor who studied anthropology at the University of Chicago. His PhD thesis was on tribes of the Andaman Islands. Alhamdulillah, his research was quite honest, and he was also able to affect government policy in the region, which was previously based on an inaccurate understanding of tribal rituals.

So yeah, some studies are great. Others are bullcrap.

[Timbit]

Originally Posted by dreamdeferred

Oh.....'cause I got the impression that you believe social science (especially anthropology) are much less biased than "hard" sciences....which is a pretty subjective interpretation which exposes your bias as it were

What I said was that I don't agree with Bro wrong_guy when he says that he feels it's easier to get away with bias in the social sciences. When I said "Just the opposite", I didn't mean that it's easier to get away with it in the hard sciences. I just meant I strongly disagree.

Hard sciences can be subject to bias as can social sciences, but I don't think it's easy to get away with it in any discipline.

But also, I think these are accusations that're lobbed at social sciences a lot. Disciplines within social science are seen as less empirical. So yeah, social scientists work really hard to keep bias from infiltrating their work.