Never tell me social sciences are incomprehensible

[kaberett]

... because they use "normal" words with specific and non-obvious meanings, especially not if you are claiming that natural/"hard" sciences don't. Because to me:

• "cold" means "under 800degC"
  
• "present" means anything from "today" to "1 January 1950" to "the last hundred thousand years"
  
• "recent" means "any time in the last 5 million years"
  
• "large variations" can encompass "approximately 5 parts per million"

This post brought to you by my having reached the stage of the day where I have a quiet helpless burying-head-in-hands hysteric upon meeting that last one in a paper I'm reading.

Comments

[birke]

Or "species" in metallurgy vs. biology vs. everything else, in my recent experience.

[kaberett]

HAHAHAHA.

[swaldman]

I don't think hard sciences do in quite the same way. I'm not sure if it's a general rule, or even guide, but all of the specific meanings that you describe are simply applying specific quantities to imprecise terms.

There are exceptions of course - the most obvious to me being physicists' use of "massive".

[kaberett]

Whereas social scientists use more precise definitions of generally imprecise terms too, as far as I'm concerned? (Plus for all that I'm "just adding quantities", it *is* the case that in general use "cold" varies depending on where you are... so "it's a bit cold out" can mean "under 20" to "below freezing" to etc depending?)