Frownland

You're entirely missing my point about culture changing.

And yeah huh, communications studies is totally a social science. You can agree with a few of my points, I won't think any less of you.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Soulflower

fdd

Frownland

Studying the effects of the media, marketing, advertising, etc. is what makes it a social science because it studies society. I guess you learn something new everyday, because it's pretty commonly referred to as a social science.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Soulflower

See my above post...

Soulflower

I personally don't consider it the same as Psychology, Sociology or a Human Family Service degree and depending on the school and curriculum its more concentrated in journalism and mass media relations at least that is what it was at the school I went too.

What I have to learn is different from what you have to learn. So maybe that is why you don't understand where I am coming from with the diversity argument.

Frownland

@DWV Our curriculum focuses heavily on communications theory, communications research, and other stuff like that. There are business-related courses of course, but communications is a multi-faceted field that incorporates a lot of theory based work into it.

You would consider sociology and psychology the same? It's a field of social science, different fields are bound to be different.

But I still don't understand how being (or becoming) an expert in one social science lends you expertise in anthropology.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Soulflower

I understand that fields are different but fields such as psychology, sociology, social work, family studies etc have to learn similar social science theories unlike "Communications."

The receipts were given and Communications is a social science however that doesn't mean you learn the same social scientific theories as psychology or even a family students degree. Its very different in that respect.


Also, I never said I was an expert in anything. I said what I was currently studying and learning in a field. However, I am not an expert or claiming to know everything about any particular field but yes diversity,immigration, social issues, etc those are areas that I am passionate about and have real interest in as well as psychology.

Further more, I never said I was an expert in anthropology either. Since anthropology is a type of social science, I posed the question, "Why can't we question scientific ideals or concepts?" Never have I claimed to be an expert in that area.

I like questioning things and I think everybody should do that. I don't think we should accept things as is.

Frownland

Yes, the social sciences realm is quite diverse (diverse means that there are several different types of fields under that umbrella term). Just because some do not study the exact same things does not mean that one invalidates the other because of this, that's actually one of the reasons why they're different fields. I know, crazy right? We'll come to a civil disagreement if you're willing though: I'll consider things by their generally agreed upon definitions and you can cherrypick which definitions you use to back up your arguments best.

And you implied that you knew how racist science can be by addressing that you're a social sciences major, as if that gives you insight to the standards for physical sciences (which seems to be the opposite of the case based off of this thread). So I'm asking, how does your studying a social science affect what you know about say, physics?

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Soulflower

I think this thread discusses elements of hard science and soft science (social science) as well. We discussed racial and social constructs which has a lot to do with social science as well. I didn't bring up what I was learning to justify anything. I wanted to point out that these issues often get discussed in my classes and in what I learn. I don't see anything wrong with that really. I never came in here claiming that I was better than anyone or that I was an expert and if you feel that was what my intentions were in bringing that up, than let me clarify that was definitely not my intentions.


Also, I am not suggesting that since you are learning about Communications that you can not understand certain theories about other social sciences. However, when you learn about certain fields compared to others you do have better insight and understanding about certain themes and issues. For example, if you are not expose to diversity issues, or have to work hands on in clinics in the urban communities you might not understand where I am coming from with some of my arguments. ONCE again, you don't have to learn this in a classroom setting BUT sometimes it does help to get some type of exposure to these issues.

Frownland

Wh...What? Do you learn about concepts taught in psychology classes in a history course? Or the same things taught in a criminology course as a sociology course? What about linguistics and economics? Yet all of these things are social sciences.

Social science is an umbrella term, don't push a study into the rain just because it's not identical to the ones that you're the most familiar with.

I'm still wondering why you brought it up as a way to prove that science is racist though. Before you say "oh I didn't say that", you did not directly say this but rather implied it quite strongly (implying something is saying it without bluntly stating it).

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.