Is mathematical science a science? Is computer science a science?

 

computer science is a mathematical science.

The problem I have rex is a big part of what duke said, in that there are no real laws. Reading PoliSci articles, for me, is maddening to the nth degree. One had a fairly convincing argument that tax funding for one program was used to skim off state budgets. And used to show that increasing federal funding for states didn't always lead to them applying that funding to anything other than deficits. And they couldn't even prove it! It was nothing more than a correlation, that at the end completely untied itself with it's admitted faults.

 

And more, I'm so tired of reading political science articles that are mostly asking other people to create the data to definitively say what this p. scientist couldn't.

 

I appreciate them trying to scientifically explain how government works, and I suppose I'm talking about an area different than others here, but to me it's a load of hogwash that I"m no better off reading way too often.

The science part of Political Science refers to the scientific method we all learned about in like 5th grade. Independent and dependent variables, hypothesis, etc. etc. PolSci uses the same method as other sciences, but instead of running experiments to prove the hypothesis we have to look at historical trends and causality. Science doesn't have to be limited to test-tubes or excavation.

 

The one difference I'm willing to acknowledge is PolSci doesn't have overwhelmingly supported theories like evolution for biology or gravity for physics. Ive heard it put as "there are no laws of political science." Not that I think that forbids PolSci from being counted as a scientific discipline.

 

I guess a good follow-up would be, is Political Science important? That probably was Coburn was getting at with this amendment.

 

You have no idea how happy this made me feel when I read it, after dealing with people who just brush it off and push phony science for the past week and a half out at school.

 

Oh and political science...I don't know, I don't really think of it as science, but that doesn't make it useless. It is still a very important field.

Political Science is to science as NASCAR is to sports.

Political Science is to science as NASCAR professional wrestling is to sports.

 

The demarcation problem is an issue science philosophers have struggled with for decades/ centuries.

 

I'd tend to say that, no, it isn't "science" in the way that biology, physics, chemistry etc. are. Too much guesswork, too little objectively, externally verifiable predictions and models.

Political Science is to science as NASCAR is to sports.

That's kind of a retarded thing to say.

 

edit- I probably have to clarify this to avoid being suspended:

 

The problem with political science is the end, not the means. Political Science uses the scientific method, gathers evidence, sometimes even tests a hypothesis and comes up with a result. Unfortunately the result is constantly up for debate and often contradicts other historical trends.

 

The end result of a NASCAR race or season is no different than any other sport, somebody clearly wins. Its that the means of winning require little athletic ability where NASCAR's viability as a sport is hurt.

Edited November 25, 200916 yr by DukeNukeEm

No there is a problem with the means as well.

 

The best way to use the Scientific method is to isolate a single variable(s) so that the data is meaningful. If you have innumerable variables the experiment is not really worthwhile because you can never be sure what caused that specific result.

 

At least that is my opinion.

No there is a problem with the means as well.

 

The best way to use the Scientific method is to isolate a single variable(s) so that the data is meaningful. If you have innumerable variables the experiment is not really worthwhile because you can never be sure what caused that specific result.

 

At least that is my opinion.

 

I agree. I'm so glad I won't have to read another political science study again. They can really only analyze the past, cannot predict the future at all, and their analysis is never definable.