To restate the theme of this essay about the ideas of a famous psychologist in Britain who advocates for more funding and a better attitude about the Social Science:
Sir Dr. Cooper, psychologist, says, to paraphrase:
Social Science are important and desperately needed–trust me, I am a Social Scientist. We need to tell the world how to organize societies and we need more funding for the wonderful research we are doing to prove how important our ideas are.
Can I laugh here at his pretense?
My short response to his arrogance is–your research and ideas and policy proposals are pregnant with your ideological baggage–you are an impediment to good intellectual inquiry and the social sciences are a bag of twaddle because you cheat on your research to prove up your theories and ideology. You suffer from incurable ideologically driven confirmation bias and tunnel vision.
Social sciences attract people who want to meddle. That compromises the integrity of their research and allows for the fudging and cheating that they do constantly to prove up their preferences and biases.
So Sir Cooper (so important in English academia he got knighted) proposes that social sciences are important because society must be made safe and good for people.
In the same way psychiatry is important, sure it is important, but not necessarily effective and salutary for society in its practice and methodology. Sure there are good and effective psychiatrists, but is psychiatry as practiced good or bad for its patients in many areas–unfortunately it is bad as practiced by many–pushing diagnoses and pills is not beneficial if mindless.
As for social sciences, political science, sociology, psychology, and all the variation–sure they are important but often they are corrupt and cause more harm than good because of ideologically driven bad science that creates bad conclusions and recommendations. Does the good outweigh the bad???
However these smart asses can’t be trusted because their ideology gets in the way of good social sciences and effective social and civic policy.
Note that the writer up front claims that limited government is a bad approach–get the picture–big government run by ruling class smart ass leftists is the answer–George Orwell predicted it. WE need more social science meddlers, more funding for the army of nannies who have no common sense and a distorted vision of the human condition and the way to healthy societies.
For starters, how could a socialist fever swamp like academic social sciences be good for society–didn’t they count the deaths engineered by socialist governments for the 20th century?
As William Voegeli explains so well, socialists are misguided, often wrong but never in doubt about their superiority, Sir Dr. Coopeer fits the profile.
Leftist oligarchs are driven by collectivist/socialist compassion, empathy and pity, and an extremely high opinion of themselves–so they suffer the vice of hubris. Frequently they adhere to bad, not good social policies because they are governed by ideology and emotion, not the skeptical scientific method.
Hubris saturates this essay about social sciences as the way to improving society and the human condition.
My irritation with these people is how bad their research and policy proposals are–they have no sense–they live and breathe their leftist statist ideology and jigger research to excuse their overwhelming desire to tell people how to live in their socialist utopian construct.
These people are so poorly informed that they think socialist statism is the solution to social and civic problems.
Big Brother cares, don’t you love big Brother.