Whats the most respectable social/human science ?

Whats the most respectable social/human science ?

Archeology.

Either economics, psychology or linguistics.

Why no sociology ?

Too easy to grasp and rampant relativism.

Economics is just applied psychology.

Still respectable because of all the matu involved.

its not applied psychology , but ive heard they want to include it nowadays for better models

because it is a mucky field that lacks rigour because it allows in charlatans only interested in pushing ideology.

there's a very low bar set for demonstrating your claims.

it's perfectly easy to get pubished as a sociologist simply by doing "discourse analysis" where you cherrypick media and write about how these piece of media show x about attitudes towards gender equality, for example.

thefield of sociology would be A LOT better if every sociology department were suddenly merged with the economics department and the head of the economics department decided which academics to keep and which to fire.
the few sociologists who actually did serious research would remain and every sociologist using the field as an excuse to espouse critical theory o other garbage ideology with out systematic use of evidence would be cast out.

it si actually not.

the rigorous kind of eco for math people are not derived from psychology at all.

only if business adm. and partially econ major classes

geography and demography, the rest are garbage

Behavioral psychology/neuroscience is the most rigorous out of them and is entirely experimental.

Linguistics is more survey data and CS-like than a true experimental science.

Econ is primarily survey data and faulty assumptions about human behavior.

Sociology is a joke.

>Econ grad students telling me I have to do calc 1-3, stats, probability, real analysis for grad school

>meanwhile BizAdmins who have to take intro micro and macro for their undergrad degree calling themselves economists

>faulty assumptions about human behavior.

>humans consistently behave rationally
>not a false statement

Teaching or history?

>assuming econ assumes rational actors
>not what butthurt philosowanks tell themselves when they're pining at their non-degree.

I recommend actually studying rational choice theory instead of regurgitating what you heard on Veeky Forums user. You may actually learn something.

>non experimental assumptions about human behavior

Wow, what a science.

>Humans
Not consistently behaving lazily/sluggishly

>Physics is just applied math

pure mathematics

nice trips and literally everything is applied math. There are only two subjects, pure math and applied math

Ecnomics>History>Psychology>PoliticalScience>Lit>Anthropology>Sociology>Social Work

Medicine.

IE, two subtypes of applied philosophy.

Economics

>uses stats
>uses game theory
>uses calc
>uses programming
>complex systems analysis

feels so good

I'm going to be crucified for this, but I think it's easier to say which ones are not respectable.
Shit tier
>Gender studies.
>All the studies.
>Education*(The idea is fine, the people who go into it are usually shitheads)
>Literature/english. (Because this isn't a thing you need to pay money to study)
>Communications/journalism.
Better tier
>History and related fields(anthro, archaeology, etc)
>Economics, money stuff.
Brainmaster tier (of the humanities)
>Philosophy and associated fields.
>Psychology(the market for psych grads is too saturated, but the field is still awesome)
And that's what I got to say about that.

Cool man, you made math camo.

Economics.

>(Because this isn't a thing you need to pay money to study)
What if you don't live in Burgerland and don't have to pay for your education?

Sociology is the reason why social/humam sciences are not respected in the first place. It is filled with ideology and shady research methods.

>Philosophy and associated fields.
>Brainmaster tier (of the humanities)
Yeah, no. Philosophy is shit tier.

The responses show how sjw's and progressives have fucked up our collective thought.

My answer would be Geography.

t. brainlet

>>Literature/english. (Because this isn't a thing you need to pay money to study)
Why do you hate art ?

>econ
A politician asks an economist about the implications of his research on a policy proposal. The economist leads the politician into an empty room, shuts the door, closes th windows, and says "What do you want the result to be?"

The only things economists agree on are things that are not particularly popular.

You mean econometrics? Which is just a fancy name for how economists conduct regression?

Its not just conducting regression, its all about parsing good data out of natural experiments and minimizing the effect of potentially confounding variables

Thats more of a fault with the professional state of economists than a fault with the field itself

this is exactly what everybody that's ever used a regression model seeks to do, in any field.

=> econometrics = regression analysis on econ data

Q.E.D