My college treats history as a social science on par with anthropology, psychology, economics

>my college treats history as a social science on par with anthropology, psychology, economics ,

Accurate ? Is it science ?

how can history possibly be a science, please tell me all the applications of the scientific method that you can apply to history.

doesn't matter if it should be treated as social science, you are underestimating the importance of history.

>scientism

grow up kiddo

none of those are science

Science is a framework of thinking not a set of fields.

Limiting science to certain fields is just elitist masturbation.

Absolutely history can be and should be taught as a science

fuck off

History is important to know and something that everyone should have a basic understanding of but has become one of the "I'm not good enough for a real degree so I'll study history because mommy and daddy said I need a degree".
It's foolish, our society does not have a need for such a supply of history majors.

It's important but as a background or a hobby, there are very few needs or positions for someone to study history as their career.

>political fairy tales
>science
pick one

...

Exactly. If anything it's more of a science than the other fields listed.

>the scientific method
No such thing.

>Accurate ?
They're all equally not sciences.

In that they are all not not science.

that does make sense

"Science" is a method not a discipline, you can study ANYTHING scientifically.

Hello edgelord.

The number of history majors has been in decline for over a decade.

Over a quarter of history degrees go to law school.Some go into the field, some go into teaching.

Some will go on to do the same 9-5 monkey job that the 800,000 business majors will do. Except history majors will actually have learned something.

I was thinking along the same line earlier today. My high school program was pretty good, so when we were doing history we would often also study the meta of how historians review or produce primary literature. Thinking back to those times now as a second year grad student in genetics, I'm fucking thankful for the peer review system that functions sometimes as a pain in the ass, but at least allows me to read papers without the constant "This author is a fucking hack who doesn't know shit" running through my head.

This is correct.

However certain disciplines are known for their rigorous application of the scientific method, and others for their very loose interpretation of it, or its even rejection.

There are still a lot of hacks after peer review. In a perfect world we'd have peer review and extensive replication studies. But I see your point, I've just been very disappointed with some papers in high impact journals lately.

>"Science" is a method
[citation needed]

>you can study ANYTHING scientifically.
Except for the paranormal.

I guess that's true. I also don't mean to disrespect Historians or the study of history- I understand there is a lot of rigor to be found in some fields, especially as things become easier to crosscheck with information access being so high.

Though I do agree that extensive replication studies would make the system as perfect as it could feasibly get- while simultaneously understanding the limitations of certain things being too expensive to realistically replicate just to check findings.

The rest of the list at least has aspects you can apply the scientific method to, though you won't have the same level of control over experiments you try to carry out as you would in a hard science.
He didn't say anything about its importance, zeldafag.

Honestly people on Veeky Forums bring job jobs way too much. Makes me thing if everyone here is just an undergrad...

>I don't want to go into (field), the starting salary is only 90,000 dollars
t. fucking everyone these days

>tfw I just want to be comfy

I would take a pay cut of $200k if the
Bachelors>med school>residency
Cycle of premed was made shorter and cheaper

But I graduated with the wrong bachelor's and realized top late I wanted to be a doctor

Never too late for STEM related program in grad school into med school, user. I know lots of people who have done it. The research, conferences, teaching provide a lot of the shit that looks good on an application and then if you end up getting rejected you can at least use the masters.

except for science itself

science just means knowledge. So all things you learn are technically a science. Mechanics is a science, cooking (gastronomy) is a science.

You would know that if you studied history instead of feeling slightly superior than everyone arund you.

>Science just means knowledge
No.

Why is everyone projecting that I feel superior because of my degree or that I'm gatekeeping what is or isn't science? I'm the OP I was just asking a fucking question. Never did I ever imply history is somehow lesser or not a science. I was just curious what you all thought.

Honestly I'm not one to bring up projecting but the fucking insanity people are saying in this thread about the way I think is just blasphemous.

What's with shitting on Business majors? They are at the bottom, but they are definitely better off than historians, because they have actual marketable skills, even if very few, as opposed to historians, who don't have any, whatsoever.

This is Veeky Forums not Veeky Forums, if all you care about is potential job and salary you should 100% not be on this board.

>history
>science

No, but you can apply science to history.

History is a great way to lie and spread propaganda.

Sure. None of those are real sciences. "Science", like every other word crazy college lefties get ahold of doesn't mean anything anymore.

Have you though5 bout This? How is history diff. To evolutionaru biology q

HIstory at my school is under humanities and under social sciences for some reason.

>treats history as a social science
my college does the same

Become a PA

user are you drunk?