Re: Relationship between natural and social 'sciences'

To Brett at the School of Life:

You put forth a good question and one which has concerned me.  I have even 
written a paper on it.  I started out my undergraduate education in the 
60s in political science and then switched to philosophy.  I went on to 
social sciences on my MA degree.  I received my Ph.D. in biological 
anthropology--the study of humans as biological organisms (in other words, 
human biology).  However, in my studies I had to confront I had to confront 
the cultural anthropologists including the archaeologists who were as you 
put it, "co-opting" the scientific method in their areas of study.

This is fine, in my view, if there is a very good understanding of the 
scientific areas which they are co-opting as models for their topics of 
concern.  Often there is not an adequate level of understanding of science 
and the scientific method.

For example, I had a lot of trouble with archaeologists using models of 
evolutionary biology to explain cultural change.  The mechanisms of 
biological evolution cannot be directly correlated with what transpires in 
culture or society.  They can be used as models or teaching devices, but 
there are huge differences which must be understood.  Humans (and all 
primates for that matter) are characterized by a high degree of plasticity. 
To arrive at laws of human behavior is not a very real possibilty in my 
view.

Now, many will disagree with me and that is fine and well.  But, this is 
where I stand after 30 years of looking at these issues.  Please write me 
if you have further questions or want to discuss this.  My personal e-mail 
is smerken@intrnet.net.

Thanks,

Dr. Dave