Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

No-Contribution-7871 t1_j1nd6mq wrote

Reply to comment by TenaceErbaccia in Childhood body mass index is unlikely to have a big impact on children's mood or behavioural disorders by giuliomagnifico

I didn't say that the buckets of salt should be aimed towards the objective data received from experiments, simply that they should be aimed at the all studies.

Data in itself is trivial in nature. Of course water freezes at 0 C and boils at 100 C, because that is part of what defines water. Performatively though, that very point is, although objective in one manner, used rhetorically. In the same fashion, data from objective studies must be interpreted by subjects which is where salt should be aimed at.

6

thruster_fuel69 t1_j1ne3x7 wrote

Love this thread, just want to mention my general response to this is other sciences have a fundamental truth in reality that social science currently can't achieve.

Not disagreeing that all science shouldn't get salt, but I stand by saying some, like social science, deserve buckets due to their nature.

0

shipsAreWeird123 t1_j1p2pyy wrote

The fundamental truths are all based on linguistics and your definitions of the things you're measuring, and then the science of the measuring tools and strategy.

There are so many flaws in all of our rodent experimentation. Sexism in medicine, what about a foundation of basic biology built mainly on studying male rodents and then extrapolating to humans.

Even physics when you get down to it ends up being an existential debate about the nature of the universe.And the more we discover, the weirder things get.

−1