Differences among the PhDs

Methods and results differ among the various sciences.  This comes from differences in their subject matter and is not always understood, even by scientists.

Our consultants are scientists, of the “hard science” sort: physics and chemistry and astronomy, wielding advanced mathematics and sometimes wearing white lab coats.  That’s what most people think of when the word “scientist” appears, though often biologists (not among our group) would also appear.  Social scientists, anthropologists and sociologists for example, have a rather different image.

Indeed, there are some who question whether they are “scientists” at all; their methods and conclusions can seem suspiciously subjective and uncertain, especially to those who take (consciously or not) Physics as the example that all science should strive to resemble.  Our astronomer once overheard a physicist say, “If you cannot do a controlled, repeatable experiment, it’s not science.”  He may have said it only to taunt the astronomers in the room, because of course running controlled experiments on stars is beyond our powers.  As is such experimentation in paleontology, for example, or geology.

It does not follow, however, that astronomy and geology are simply some arcane forms of speculation from which no firm knowledge can be expected.  Indeed, our astronomer maintains that parts of his science are better understood and more firmly grounded than parts of physics (though we try to restrain him from such outbursts in public).  Similarly, social scientists are forced by the nature of their subjects to work in different ways and to generate a different kind of knowlege.

We’re reluctant to cite details, since these fields are beyond our own expertise.  But one of our consultants spent two years as an AAAS Fellow at the US Agency for International Development, where “hard” scientists are rare and social scientists abound.  He was impressed by the sheer difficulty of the task the latter face, from the complexity of people and societies as well as the impossibility of controlling–well, much of anything.  And yet, they did produce results.  Convincing and reliable results.  Moreover, the results were often of immense immediate practical importance.

Not all sciences will ever become as precise, mathematical and deductive as Physics.  Many cannot, and should not; they are different fields; not worse or less evolved, just different.