Helen Pluckrose

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.

Those arguments can be convincing because based on something. They can be wrong. If they can't be, its pseudoscience. Else, science.

Yes, if we define science as addressing any argument which can be right or wrong but I feel this misses the essence.