2 Comments
Jul 27Liked by Kevin Munger

You know I'm standing in the choir, but this is so good from start to end.

My one quibble is that I don't think it's helpful to think about social science as engineering. Tinkering with machines has a different character. I think a helpful framework for quantitative social science would be quantitative social story telling, appealing more to the exploratory spirt of Tukey than the rigid spirts of Popper or Fisher.

Expand full comment
author

I 100% agree. I'm of two minds of how to critique social science, so my writing is sometimes a bit schizo if I don't delineate what I'm doing when.

Here, when I'm engaging with the idea of social science as engineering, I'm trying to point out how the logics driving the progression of methodology are going to lead to contradictions.

This is mostly bc it seems more pragmatic. People are familiar with these logics, they use them to justify their own practice, so my hope is that they'll at least take it seriously.

But having a vision of what social science *should be* is the ultimate goal. And yes bringing people like Tukey into the pantheon is a great idea

Expand full comment