There's not a rigid boundary between culture & science coz science is part of culture.But we don't always have to look at science culturallyhttps://twitter.com/JCMaas/status/854304208694194176 …
We can mean different things - an institution, a focus of study, a method etc. Just need to clarify which sense we're using it in.
-
-
I'm talking about method mainly here.
-
I'm thinking mostly about focus of study. Looking at the way ppl think culturally & the way they think scientifically is very different.
-
I'm certainly interested in cognitive mechanisms underlying it but I'm more interested in language & attitudes & ideology affecting culture.
-
These can certainly be measured scientifically but this, to me,is less interesting than trying to understand how it all works in ppl's minds
-
This is mostly about definitions, but I pers. don't see why that shouldn't be called science. If your ideas are falsifiable, it's science.
-
They're not falsifiable & making them so is not the point. One of my professors & her husband is making a database of phrases in manuscripts
-
Then people will be able to search and find how commonly things were being talked about. Much more data at our fingertips.
-
That's science. I'm more interested in pulling out attitudes and making convincing arguments about their influences & significance.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
(Poppers demarcation criterion)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.