Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Sep 25, 2025 11:50 am
Social sciences include human feelings indirectly, while modern biologists have no use for feelings at all.
No, that's not quite true. Biologists might have less use for them, but they still enter into the study of living beings. Physics, by contrast, are heavily coded in mathematical language and tied to the physical realities of the external world. And that's why Physics is considered the "hardest" of the sciences.
Physicists include subjectivity of the human observer more and more compared with Newtonian physicists.
All sciences, including Physics, involve human observers. But not all depend on the reliability of human intution as much as the others. The human observer is, indeed, always a vulnerable point in any scientific theory or conclusion. But not equally. And measures like reproduceability, quantity of data, simplicity, and so forth (called "epistemic virtues") make Physics and Chemistry less susceptible to human error than Biology, and much less vulnerable than the Social "Sciences," which in many cases, do not really merit the term "science" at all. For a "science" has to comprise a
specific methodology, a specific discipline pertaining to its subject: and Social "Sciences" drawn on all sorts of things, like intuition or creative imagination, that do not have any disciplinary method of their own, and on fragments from other disciplines that do have their own specific methodologies.
...the commodifying of life leads to war and poverty.
If that were true, there would be no wars or poverty in places in which there was no "commodifying." But in point of fact, we find that ancient and tribal societies, where "commodification" is unknown, are generally warlike and marked by a very, very low level of subsistence -- often well below what we would class as any Western "poverty line." So that theory falls to pieces immediately.
You've spent too much time with Marxists, it seems. Has it not occurred to you that all their explanations always turn out to be as wrong as Marx's own, and often poison everything on their way throught society? Just how has Critical Theory, or BLM, or Antifa "helped" us get anywhere?
Marxists can bellyache. They're also great at destruction, abuse and death. What they can never seem to do is build something good.
