“Social science” is neither social nor science.

Here’s the latest.

Scientists have revealed one of the reasons why some folks are less religious than others: They think more analytically, rather than going with their gut.

You’re groaning, “Oh god, wormme’s on another theology rant.  Run for it!”  But actually I’m not.  Rational arguments can be made for atheism. 

Just not for social “science”.

Seriously, look at that study.  Familiarize yourself with the…for lack of a better word, methodology and conclusions.  Now riddle me this…

what the hell good is it?! 

What scientific use does it serve?  What value, at all, does it add to human knowledge or wisdom?  It claims a difference in cognition between two groups?  Okay, let’s run a simulation of mental combat between atheists and theists.  Make it two fights, a doubleheader (pun intended). 

Round one: loyal commenter edohiguma versus Karl Childers

Round two:  Bill Maher versus Isaac Newton.

Let’s see…superlatively intelligent atheist bests “Mr. Sling Blade”, just as these social psychologists would have you expect.  But then…a moron non-believer loses to one of the keenest minds in all history?   How could that be??

Social science is neither social nor science.  In fact, when used by the political Left it is profoundly antisocial. It is for marginalizing, dividing, and conquering all opposition to progressive…oops, “progressive” ends.  “Ha-ha, Christians are ignorant and stupid.  Here’s proof!” 

Except it isn’t.  Here at W.I.N., the Wormme Institute of Notions, we’ve done some research of our own.  A key finding:

Science and statistics are not synonymous.   

Discovery of a numerical discrepancy is not science.  Accounting for that discrepancy in a reproducible manner is science.  Gervais believes that “analytical thinking” and “gut feeling” are defined, scientific terms?  Wow.  And he’s got a sweet setup for challenges, too.  Point out that Newton and Leibniz were each smarter than Gervais’s entire family tree and he can just say, “but think of how much smarter they could have been.”

You know what is truly hilarious?  This experiment is utterly useless to analytical thinkers.  Its only beneficiaries are “gut thinking” atheists!  Analysts (like edohiguma) don’t need fake science to judge Christian thought from Gump to Gottfried.  It’s idiots like Maher who need constant reassurance, due to lack of actual intellect. 

So…a “scientific” study drips condescension on intuitive believers, but its only use is to give thoughtless atheists a security blanket.  S**t don’t get much more ironic than that. 

Maybe next, Gervais & Co. could examine genetic contributions to the thought process.  Could there, perhaps, be mental differences between different types of folks?  But there’s no time to wait for the professionals.  Let’s do some social science-ing of our own!

So…who is smarter, black guys or white guys?  Let’s match them up and see:

Paul Krugman versus Thomas Sowell. 

Paul Ehrlich versus George Washington Carver.

Paul McCartney versus Lloyd Marcus.

Ted Nugent versus Paul Robeson.

Socio-psychological analysis proves that black guys are smarter than white guys 75% of the time.  But wait…how about that other pattern?  It’s even more pronounced!  Do you see it?

Everyone named Paul is dumber than everyone not named Paul.

Thus, a moron wrote most of the New Testament.  It’s a proven fact!  Because of social psychology science!

About wormme

I've accepted that all of you are socially superior to me. But no pretending that any of you are rational.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to “Social science” is neither social nor science.

  1. Edohiguma says:

    You’re too nice to Maher. I often wonder why this weirdo is still on the air. He knows nothing of actual value and he’s not funny.

    Though, just like your example of black vs white, this is a tool for labeling us. All atheists get put into one box. All Christians get put into another box. All Jews are put into yet another box. Buddhists and Hindus are usually not boxed, because most western people know NAFT about them. Mohammedans never get boxed cause that would offend them somehow and then they try to kill us again and that makes everyone scared, but nobody would ever admit it. Uhm, yeah. Before I digress again…….

    It’s labels, nothing else. Black vs white. Atheist vs Christian. Conservative vs progressive. Etc. Labels. Very useful for the media and our so called leaders to keep us divided and under control. They make sure that we focus on what divides us rather than on what unites us, and they do so on purpose. Divide et impera.

    Also, I have an issue considering this science. I study Japanese Studies, but I don’t think we’re an actual science. Most of the time we can only use statistics and those aren’t really science. It’s not like we’re math (a²+b²=c²; 2+2=4, always), physics or chemistry. Especially here in Vienna we’re very sociology focused. The Germans are very literature focused. I’m primarily history focused (so I’m the nail that stands up.) History is more scientific, if you follow the rules (which, sadly, too many don’t.) Sociology, not so much. Literature, heck no. We’re not scientists.

    And well, I don’t trust a statistic that I haven’t forged myself. You can “prove” anything with statistics. Anything.

    • wormme says:

      Mark Twain was a grandmaster of quips. And, I’m sure I’ve mentioned it here before, but my very favorite one is as follows:

      “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

      “Social science” could do a lot of good if properly employed. But as currently employed it’s like applying leeches to a hemophiliac.

  2. Edohiguma says:

    Also, since Xpat isn’t here (where the F did he disappear to), I have to do this.

    Time to rock it from the delta to the DMZ!

    • wormme says:

      Well, I was getty pretty surly there for a while and he’s a sweetheart of a guy. You should probably blame me until we hear otherwise.

    • Xpat says:

      I have been here all along, comrades.

      You mean you can’t see me?!?

      My latest adventure: they opened up several miles of old, abandonded Meiji era (like 1902ish?) railroad tunnels along a river gorge, and the missus and I went up there last weekend to hike through them.

      So you can see how incredibly exciting my life is.

  3. Xpat says:

    Speaking of Carl Childers, this is one of the better mashup parody trailers I know:

    • wormme says:

      Just now seeing this, thanks! We’ve got a Slingblade nut in the office, I’ll have to share this with him.

      • Xpat says:

        Once three of us expats got into that movie to the extent that we were talking to each other like Carl Childers for about a year. (At restaurants we’d say stuff like, “I reckon I could use another dab of that wasabi if you got any extry.”)

        • wormme says:

          Heh heh. Wonder what the equivalent Japanese character is? Probably non-existent.

          • Xpat says:

            It’s actually a stock character in Japanese comedy pairs (manzai); one plays the “boke” (idiot), kind of like Dickie Smothers in the Smothers Brothers (boy am I dating myself), not quite right in the head, and sort of the comic foil for the other guy but often more funny.

            I think every culture has the naive/profound “village idiot” type who is saintly without being aware of it. In the Jewish diaspora it would be like Iaac Singer’s “Gimpel the Fool.”

          • Xpat says:

            Wait, a just realized a Japanese equivalent to Carl Childers might be the train boy in Do Des’ka-den.

            I can’t find a good clip, though.

            Man, that is a surreal (and sad) movie, not necessarily recommended.

          • wormme says:

            The “Big Man Japan” hero seemed a little slow.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s