01-24-2010, 04:49 PM
FWIW, while I'm studying in a department (Economic History) with many who would consider themselves social scientists, I consider myself a scholar (in training) rather than a scientist. Reading, interpreting, and contextualizing information from textual evidence is valuable, but it's not science. Even doing quantitative analysis with explicit hypotheses in mind strikes me as being borderline science at best, since the inherent fuzziness in human-generated data sources makes strict controls impossible.
This is not to say that there are no historical sciences - Paleontology comes to mind. I just don't consider that I'm in one of them. :)
-Jester
This is not to say that there are no historical sciences - Paleontology comes to mind. I just don't consider that I'm in one of them. :)
-Jester