Sociology is a bullshit science that is purely based on subjective opinion. Discuss

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
>muh impartial science

>Sociology is a bullshit science that is purely based on subjective opinion. Discuss.
agreed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Émile_Durkheim

well, would you look at that. the founder is a kike.

>I think statistics are not valid whatsoever
>What is peer-review
Want to know how I can tell you've never conducted research?

Some forms of social sciences are legitimate, just like some forms of hard sciences are illegitimate. It depends on whether or not there is a goal going into the study or if there is a truly unbiased quest for knowledge.

Climate science carried out by oil companies tends to show complete bullshit, because the goal is to lie and manipulate the public. Climate science carried out by tree hugging hippies also shows complete bullshit for the same reason. But in the middle you have real scientists addressing a real issue that they are passionate about.

The same can be said for social scientists. There is good work done on human development and marketing strategies that should be regarded highly. There’s good stuff about emotional stability and maintaining a healthy mental state that should also be regarded highly. It’s all about being able to critically analyze your sources regardless of the field the information comes from.

Attached: 5157E811-9DAE-46A1-B55B-B183369B8BA5.jpg (540x696, 81K)

The only real scientists in climate science are retired ones, because they cannot be fired for telling the truth, and they all tell that it is bollocks.
If a building burned with the top sociologists in the field and there were no survivors, nothing would have been lost, and a lot would have been gained.

>Strawmanning this hard
nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmp1512330

>Posts an opinion
>Thinks that discredits anything
>Nazi flag
Seems to check out

Sociology presumes that social conditions DETERMINE, not merely influence, human behavior and consciousness. It is stupid.

Sociology isn't based on subjective opinion, it's based on political agenda.

A stopped clock can certainly be right twice a day. Sociology's research can have value. But the foundation of the subject is that social conditions DETERMINE human consciousness and behavior, it assumes you can study human behavior as scientifically as you can study physics. This is bullshit.
The election of Trump was incontrovertible proof that sociology is not a real science.

And the effect was very revealing: The Left simply doesn't believe in human Freedom so they couldn't accept that people just determined for themselves that Trump was a better choice. This is why they had to bring in the Russian Hacking bullshit: you're supposed to believe that Russians just did magic sociology better than the Democrats did and manipulated social media to get them to elect Trump.
Sociologists and supporters implicitly believe only they are free and that everyone else is just part of their science experiment. They often share a lot of traits with sociopaths.

Attached: comehuman.jpg (332x382, 42K)

>Sociology is a bullshit science that is purely based on subjective opinion.

True. The social sciences as we know them today was created in American universities by John D Rockefeller Jr from 1900-1945. The reason for the social sciences is the brainwashing and control of the human species. The social sciences are the institutional supports of neoliberalism. It's not a science, it doesn't have any relation to scientific method and it has no concern for scientific inquiry., calling it science is just propaganda to present the appearance of legitimacy. The social sciences are 100% political in its goals. It was created to control humans. that's it. Control control control. The social sciences is where the strategies and methods for convincing the white races in Europe to hate themselves for being white so that they will submit to jew/chink domination.

>But the foundation of the subject is that social conditions DETERMINE human consciousness and behavior,
Not all of the field believes that. This board loves to bring up the bell curve, which supports the notion intelligence is biological.

>If it has a basis in statistics it has legitimacy
its basis is postmodernism. All the social sciences have their basis in post modernism, which would lead anyone with a brain to wonder why academic disciplines that don't even believe in the concept of truth or objectivity are passing themselves off as sciences engaged in research.

>The social sciences as we know them today was created in American universities by John D Rockefeller Jr from 1900-1945.
Again, disinformation. Most social sciences can trace their roots to the 18th-19th century.

sociology is at least theoretically of predictive value.

It is inherently a very difficult field to get any rigorous results in, and it doesn't attract anything like the talent that goes into physics, which compounds the problem.

The real problem is just that it was taken over by leftist ideologues and as such is just application of scripture rather than anything like science, but there is nothing about it that makes it necessarily that shitty, that's just how it ended up.

Sociology is the study of why you shouldn’t consider group averages when it comes to individuals unless it means you get to screw whitey somehow then you should indeed use group averages when it comes to individuals.
See, just because 6% of the population are black males and they commit 52% of the homicides doesn’t mean you should judge a black male individually but because black males as a group are more likely to be poor, you should give this individual black a check or a free pass into law school.
Sociology is literally double think: the major.

>Sociology is NECESSARY for defending conservative social policy. Every time you talk about "degeneracy", "social decline", "mass immigration and social trust", you're discussing sociology.

bullshit, you're brainwashed. Sociology is a pretend academic discipline that is intended to overshadow the real areas of academic inquiry of political philosophy and political economy. It's a bullshit postmodern communist brainwashing machine. Nothing more.

>Sociology
Based on mathematical demographics. Your thread is stupid OP. This thread will die from boredom.

Someone didn't get their sociologist degree. Sociology is pretty much psychology with more people.

>You do realize that social sciences conduct hypothesis-based research using statistics?

no they don't, you delusional idiot. They employ statistics as a rhetorical device to provide something close to evidence for their opinions. Only retards think social sciences are really science and anything they do is actually research. 60% of psychological theories turn out to be bullshit based on shoddy work. Their "scientific" methods are literally less accurate than just flipping a coin.

Attached: falsifiable.jpg (1047x827, 142K)

>You do realize how many ways there are to hack statistics?
"There are three kinds of lies- lies, damned lies, and statistics"

30 years ago maybe, but Marxists polluted sociology and psychology beyond saving

1 post by this ID
Slide thread
Sage

>There is good work done on. . .
No there isn't. There are theories you feel are valid and there are valid techniques of manipulating people, but there is zero "work" being done, just opinions presented.

Oh fuck your saying I shouldn't trust my psychologist but trust my psychiatrist?

>purely based on subjective opinion.

This isn't quite right. The studies are legit, their conclusions are ideological motivated and often bullshit.

>Again, disinformation
blow me kike. The roots of social science is Neitzsche's post modernism, not comte or durkheim or any of those other chimpanzees. You're a brainwashed idiot that still believes what the kikes taught you in school.

>Sociology is just psychology with more people
>Therefore Sociology is valid
>How to shoot yourself in the foot: the reply

>Article describing myriad ways of hacking peer-to-peer reviews in an objective research field
>"An opinion"
>Ad Hominem
Wew, lad.

>the bell curve, which supports the notion intelligence is biological
Human intelligence is certainly a computational process taking place on a biological substratum. The book does not claim IQ scores to be 100% linked to genetic factors, it only goes as far as acknowledging that the two are strongly correlated.

Some of te studies are skewed because of political biases. Sometimes a the theories will contradict themselves.

How are you able to imply a completely inaccurate statement?

>Someone didn't get their sociologist degree.
probably because they didn't want to face the ridicule of getting a pretend degree.

>making a thread specifically just to argue
>Not even a good topic
Leave

Sociology makes more sense the more people you interact with.

Less people person's less experience, more pessimism.

>Did not disprove anything

>More low IQ conspiracy theories
Gee, I wonder how Adam Smith, Lombroso, Durkheim, Becarria, and de Tocqueville were influenced by post-modernism

Kill the kike sluts taking funding from real research like agriculture

Sociology + Chaos Theory is a fun way to get yourself = Psychosis.

>Denying most CONTEMPORARY Social Science is largest based on post-Structuralist thought and that you MUST fawn over Foucault, Derrida and similar charlatans if you want to get that degree.
Also the only time Lombroso is ever brought up is in order to spit on his grave.

>Lack of reading comprehension, the post

>Intellectual dishonesty, the poster

>No, You!
Stop trying to pick petty arguments, user.

>Sociology is a bullshit science that is purely based on subjective opinion!
FTFY

youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q

>someone didn't get their sociologist degree

maybe they didn't want to be poor?

Should I put that on the shelf next to my gender studies degree and beneath my liberal arts degree?

>Thinks an undergrad degree alone will make someone rich
>Thinks someone can't make money with a sociology degree

You're a retard who drank the libertardian "rationalist" kool aid. What other field of study could properly address modern issues like the decline of social trust and the effects of open borders on the host society? How else can we discover what's causing deaths of despair among whites? Any answer you give will fall broadly under "sociology".

No one would deny that sociology programs are pozzed, but the field of sociology shouldn't be ceded to Marxists and third worldists because you judge it by your fedora wearing "real science" standards.

The libertarian, a loner by nature, rejects sociology because every word of it reminds him that his porn addict video game lifestyle is actually unhealthy and a form of retreat.

You're stupid and everyone reading this thread needs to know you're stupid so they don't buy into your shitty Ben Shapiro-esque opinions.

To each their own.

What's unhealthy to you sounds like a good time to me.

Imagine a world where real Sociology with actual standards is taught in schools. A-are those tears, senpai?

I studied 3 years of Sociology. Me and my pals reached the conclusion that if we wanted to be sociologists ALL was subjective.

I never said anything about undergrads and I'm sure there are some well connected people out there that can profit off their sociology degree, the average schmuck not so much.

this

I remember a point in time I actually believed telepathy was possible and thought that other people were thinking the exact same things I was thinking at the exact same time I thought them and convinced myself the NSA was already attempting to transfer my thoughts to a CIA agent actively MK Ultra-ing me.

butifuel girl on pic....... would marry

You have a very good point there. I've been taking a sociology course as part of my requirements for graduation, and the quacks who write our course readings never seem to consider that maybe society evolved because of human nature, and not the other way around. Like the idea of men being leaders and being more political than women is seen as cultural and therefore arbitrary, when it could easily be said to be the product of the natures of men and women. These sociologists can never admit that sometimes people just feel a certain way without having been told/taught to feel that way. Part of it is arrogance: they believe that everything falls within their purview because in their minds they must have the power to control and manipulate the behavior of all other people.

Nothing to discuss desu. Sociology is for literal retards and is not science. The opinion of any sociologist or other individual who "majored" in sociology should be immediately discarded and deemed not worthy of inspection.

Checked

based, best poster on 4chin

If the research takes factors like statistics, the role of genetics and psychology of behavior into account it can be of use as theories of the social world. If the approach just assumes 'blank slate' because doing otherwise would be problematic it has little value.