Chapter 21 Chapter 19 How to Read the Social Sciences

The concepts and terms of the social sciences permeate almost everything we read today. For example, like modern journalists, they no longer limit themselves to only reporting facts.Only the brief "who-what-happened-why-when-where" news headlines appearing on the front pages of newspapers are fact-based.Generally speaking, journalists add interpretation, comment, and analysis to the facts, and then they become news reports.These interpretations and comments are concepts and terms from the social sciences. These concepts and terms have also influenced many contemporary books and articles, and can even be classified as social commentary.We also see a lot of literature written on themes of race, crime, law enforcement, poverty, education, welfare, war and peace, good and bad government.This kind of literature borrows ideology and language from the social sciences.

Social science works are not limited to non-fiction.There are still a large number of important contemporary writers who write fiction in the social sciences.Their goal is to create an artificial social model that allows us to test the impact on society under the development of technology.In novels, dramas, stories, movies, and television, the social power organization, various wealth and ownership, and the distribution of wealth have been vividly described, condemned, and praised.These works are considered to have social significance, or contain "important messages".At the same time, they acquired and diffused elements of the social sciences.

In addition, almost any social, economic or political problem is studied by experts.These experts either do their own research or are invited by official units that directly face these issues.With the assistance of social science experts, these problems are systematically elucidated and ways to solve them are sought. The most important factor in the growth and popularity of the social sciences has been the introduction of social sciences in high school and post-secondary education.In fact, far more students take social science courses than traditional literature or language courses.Students who take social sciences far outnumber those who take "pure" science.

※ What is social science? When we talk about the social sciences, we seem to be talking about an entirely separate discipline.Not so. What exactly is social science?One way to find out is to see what disciplines and training courses are organized under such departments in universities.Social science departments typically include anthropology, economics, political science, and sociology.Why not include law, education, business, social services and public administration?All these disciplines are also developed using the concepts and methods of social sciences?The most common answer to this question is that the purpose of the latter disciplines is to train professional workers outside the university campus, while those mentioned above are more focused on the pursuit of systematic knowledge of human society, usually on university campuses. carried out in.

At present, every university has a tendency to establish interdisciplinary research centers or institutions.These research centers go beyond the boundaries of traditional social sciences and professional departments, and at the same time focus on the research of many theories and methods, including statistics, demography, electoral science (the science about elections and voting), policy and decision making, personnel training Management, public administration, human ecology, and more.The research and reports produced by these centers often combine more than ten majors.Recognizing the results of so many professional efforts is complex enough, let alone judging whether the findings and conclusions hold.

What about psychology?Some strict social scientists will exclude psychology from the social sciences, because they believe that psychology is concerned with the characteristics of individuals, while social science is concerned with cultural, institutional and environmental factors.Some scholars with less strict distinctions believe that physiological psychology should be classified as biological science, while normal or abnormal psychology should belong to social science, because the individual and society as a whole are inseparable. Incidentally, among the current social science courses, psychology is the most popular subject among students.Nationally, there are probably more students taking psychology than any other department.A great deal has been published on psychology, from the most specialized to the most general.

What about behavioral science?What role do they play in the social sciences?In its original usage, the behavioral sciences include sociology, anthropology, behavioral biology, economics, geography, law, psychology, psychiatry, and political science.Behavioral science places particular emphasis on the systematic study of observable and measurable behaviors in order to obtain verifiable findings.Behavioral science has become almost synonymous with social science in recent years, but many traditionalists object to such usage. Last but not least, what about history?We all know that the social sciences cite historical research in order to obtain data and to exemplify their inferences.However, although history can barely be called science in terms of knowledge structure when describing special events and characters, it cannot be called science in terms of the systematic knowledge provided by history itself to human behavior and development patterns and rules.

So, can we define social science?We think so, at least for the purposes of this chapter.Disciplines such as anthropology, economics, political science, and sociology are the core of the social sciences, and almost all social scientists will include these disciplines.Furthermore, we believe that most social scientists should consider most, if not all, works on law, education, public administration, and some on business and social services, plus a great deal on psychology, to be appropriate Definition of social science.We speculate that such a definition is not precise, but you can see what we are going to say next.

※ Easy to read social science Most of the social sciences seem like very easy to read works.The content of these works is often drawn from experiences familiar to the reader—in this respect, the social sciences are like poetry and philosophy—and the discourse is often narrative, familiar to readers of fiction and history . Furthermore, we are all already familiar with the terminology of the social sciences and use it often.Terms such as culture (comparative culture, counterculture, subculture), group, alienation, status, input/output, substructure, ethics, behavior, consensus, and many others are almost common words that modern people talk and read .

Think of "society", what a chameleon word it is, with an infinite number of adjectives that can be added to it, but it always expresses a broad definition of people living in groups rather than living in isolation.We have heard of a disordered society, a dysfunctional society, a silent society, a greedy society, a wealthy society... We can start from the first letter in the English dictionary and find the "zymotic" society at the end Adjectives like this -- this refers to a society that is in constant turmoil, like our own. We can also think of "society" as an adjective, again with many familiar meanings.Like social forces, social pressure, social commitment, and of course the ubiquitous social problems.The last is a particularly prone subject matter when reading or writing about the social sciences.We bet you have probably read or even written about "political, economic and social issues" in the last few months if not the last few weeks.When you read or write, you probably have a good idea of ​​what political and economic issues stand for, but what do you, or the writer, mean by social issues?

The terminology and metaphors sociologists use to write, combined with the depth of emotion in the writing, trick us into thinking it's easy to read.The material quoted in the book is very familiar to readers, indeed, it is the words they read or hear every day.In addition, readers' attitudes and feelings are closely related to the development of these issues.Philosophical questions talk about things that we generally know, but we don't usually get "into" philosophical questions.But we all have very strong opinions about the issues discussed in the social sciences. ※ Difficulties in reading social science Paradoxically, what we said earlier that makes social science seem easy to read is also what makes social science difficult to read.For example, the last factor we mentioned earlier-you, as a reader, have to give some perspective to the author's point of view.Many readers worry that they are disloyal to themselves by admitting that they disagree with the author and objectively question the work they read.However, as long as you are reading with analytical reading, such an attitude is necessary.Such an attitude is already indicated in the rules of reading we have been talking about, at least in the rules of outlining and interpreting the work.If you are going to answer the first two questions that should be asked of any reading of any work, you must first check what your own opinion is.You cannot understand a book if you refuse to listen to what an author has to say. Familiar terminology and perspectives in the social sciences also create barriers to understanding.Many social scientists themselves are well aware of this problem.They are very opposed to the arbitrary use of social science terms and ideas in general news reports or other types of writing.For example, the concept of Gross National Product (GNP Gross National Product), in serious economic works, this concept has a certain limited usage.But, some social scientists say, many journalists and columnists let the concept take too much responsibility.They use it too much, but they don't know what the real meaning is.Obviously, if in the works you read, the author regards a phrase that he doesn't know well as a keyword, then you will definitely be confused. Let us make this point a little clearer.We must first distinguish the social sciences from the natural sciences—physics, chemistry, etc.We have already known that the author of a scientific work (referring to the latter kind of "science") will state the assumptions and proofs very clearly, and at the same time make sure that the reader can easily reach a consensus with him and find the main idea of ​​the book.Because coming to an agreement with the author and finding the gist is the most important part of reading any expository work, scientists do this part of the job for you.Still, you'll find it hard to read the work in mathematical form, and you'll find it hard to comment on the book—that is, answer " Is this real?" The "What does this book have to do with me?" question.It is important, however, to read scientific works more easily than any other expository work. In other words, what the author of the natural sciences has to do is "specify his terms"—that is, he tells you what the basic meanings of words are in his account and how he uses them.Such explanations usually appear at the beginning of the book, and may be explanations, assumptions, axioms, and so on.Since descriptive terms are characteristic of the field, it has been said that they are like a game, or have "the structure of a game."Descriptive terms are like the rules of a game.If you want to play poker, you don't argue about whether three of a kind is stronger than two pair.If you were to play bridge, you wouldn't argue with the rule that queens can capture jacks (of the same suit), or that the highest ace can capture any card (in contract bridge).Likewise, when reading a work in the natural sciences, you do not argue with the author about his rules of use.You accept the rules and start reading. The term explanation, which has been common in the natural sciences until recently, has remained less common in the social sciences.One reason is that the social sciences cannot be mathematized, and another reason is that in the social or behavioral sciences it is difficult to explain the terms.It's one thing to define a circle or an isosceles triangle, quite another to define economic depression or mental health.Even if a social scientist wanted to define such a term, his readers would want to question the correctness of his use.As a result, the social scientist has to struggle with the meaning of his words throughout the book—and his struggles make reading difficult for readers. The most difficult thing about reading social science works is the fact that the works in this field are mixed rather than purely expository.We already know how history mixes fiction and science, and how we read with that in mind.We are already familiar with this mix and have a great deal of experience with it.But in the social sciences the situation is quite different.Too many social science works mix science, philosophy, and history, often even with a touch of fiction for added effect. If the social sciences had only one method of confounding, it would be familiar to us, because that's the way history is.But it is not.In the social sciences, every book is confounded in a different way, and the reader must first determine what he is confounding in the book he is reading.These factors may vary within the same book or from book to book.It is not easy to distinguish all these clearly. Do you remember that the first step in analytical reading is to answer the question: What kind of book is this?In the case of fiction, this question is fairly easy to answer.If it is a scientific or philosophical work, it is not difficult.Even with mixed forms of history, readers generally know that they are reading history.But the different elements that make up the social sciences—sometimes this, sometimes that, sometimes another model—make it difficult to answer this question when we read anything about the social sciences.In fact, it is as difficult a matter as it is to define social science. Still, readers of analytical reading have to figure out how to answer this question.This is not only the first job he has to do, but also the most important job.If he can tell what elements the book he read is made up of, he will be able to go a step further to understand it. Outlining the structure of a social science book is not a big problem, but reaching consensus with the authors, as we said, is extremely difficult.The reason is that the author cannot clearly explain his own rules of language.Still, it's possible to get some general insight into keywords.From the meaning of words to see the theme and discussion, if it is a good book, these are still not a problem.But one last question: what does this have to do with me?It requires a little self-control from the reader.At this time, a situation we mentioned earlier may happen-the reader may say: "I can't find the author's shortcomings, but I just don't agree with him." The conclusions are already biased. ※ Read social science works In this chapter, we have said many times about "works of the social sciences" but never about "books of the social sciences".This is because when reading the social sciences, it is common to read several books on a topic, not just one.This is not only because social science is a new field with only a few classic works, but also because when we read social science, we mainly focus on a particular event or problem rather than a particular author or book.For example, if we are interested in enforcement law, we will read several related books at the same time.Maybe we care about issues of race, education, taxes, and local government, and that's the same thing.Basically, there are no authoritative works in these fields, so we have to read many related books.And social scientists themselves also have a phenomenon, that is, in order to keep up with the times, they must constantly introduce new ones, revise their works, new works replace old works, and outdated statements are constantly eliminated. To some extent, the same happens with philosophy, as we have seen.To fully understand a philosopher, you should read what the philosopher himself is reading, as well as the books of other philosophers who influenced him.In a way, so is history.We mentioned that if you want to discover facts about the past, you are better off reading several books rather than just one.In these cases, however, your chances of finding a major, authoritative work are considerable.This is not the case in the social sciences, so it is even more necessary to read many related books at the same time when reading such books. The rules of analytical reading do not apply to the simultaneous reading of many books on a single topic.Analytical reading applies to reading individual books.Of course, if you want to make good use of these rules, you must study and observe carefully.The new reading rules to be introduced next require us to pass the third level of reading (analytical reading) before we can enter the fourth level of reading (thematic reading).We are now ready to discuss the fourth level of reading.Because social science works have such characteristics, it is necessary to use this kind of reading. Pointing this out can explain why we put the social science issues at the end of the third part of this book.Now you should understand why we organize our discussion the way we do.In the beginning we were talking about how to read practical works, which is quite different from other reading, because the reader has a specific obligation, namely, to act if he agrees with the author's point of view.Then we discuss fiction and poetry, asking different questions than we read expository works.Finally, we discuss three kinds of theoretical expository works—science and mathematics, philosophy, and the social sciences.Social science is placed last because such books require topical reading.This chapter can therefore be said to be the conclusion of the third book and the introduction to the fourth book.