LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:48:11 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
From: Allan Scherlen <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:54:22 -0400

Then by extrapolation Ari must be dismissive of all the social
"sciences" beyond political "science" for similar reasons whether
those sciences measures voting patterns by race or gender,
sociological phenomena, crime statistics, and human behavior in
general.

Allan Scherlen

On 3/27/2013 9:54 PM, LIBLICENSE wrote:

> From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 23:29:24 -0700
>
> Science - by definition - is the field, which allows for replicating
> experiments. You can demonstrate you statement again and again.
>
> Politics denies even a possibility of replication of any experiment.
> For example, there is nothing in politics which is considered
> disproved.
>
> Therefore attaching to it the word "science" is an oxymoron.
> "Political science" is simply a venue to produce political coterie.
> Cum grano salis, I would compare it with Hollywood.
>
> True, NSF may sponsor science fiction movies. It also may sponsor
> political science "research" and thus the future politicians who argue
> for increase of funding of ... NSF. A vicious circle?
>
> Ari Belenkiy

ATOM RSS1 RSS2