Hard and soft science
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
(Difference between revisions)
| Revision as of 17:38, 26 June 2011 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 17:38, 26 June 2011 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| - | ====Anti-psychiatry and deinstitutionalization==== | + | '''Hard science''' and '''soft science''' are colloquial terms often used when comparing fields of [[academic research]] or [[scholarship]], with ''hard'' meaning ''perceived as being more scientific, rigorous, or accurate''. Fields of the [[natural sciences|natural]], [[physical sciences|physical]], and [[computing science|computing sciences]] are often described as '''hard''', while the [[social sciences]] and similar fields are often described as '''soft'''. The hard sciences are characterized as relying on [[experiment]]al, [[empirical]], [[quantification|quantifiable]] data, relying on the [[scientific method]], and focusing on accuracy and [[Objectivity (science)|objectivity]]. Publications in the hard sciences such as [[natural science]]s make heavier use of graphs than soft sciences such as [[sociology]], according to the [[graphism thesis]]. |
| - | The introduction of [[psychiatric medication]]s and the use of [[medical laboratory|laboratory]] tests altered the [[doctor-patient relationship]] between psychiatrists and their patients. Psychiatry's shift to the [[hard science]]s had been interpreted as a lack of concern for patients. [[Anti-psychiatry]] had become more prevalent in the late twentieth century due to this and publications in the media which conceptualized mental disorders as myths. Others in the movement argued that psychiatry was a form of social control and demanded that institutionalized psychiatric care, stemming from Pinel's thereapeutic asylum, be abolished. Incidents of physical abuse by psychiatrists took place during the reign of some totalitarian regimes as part of a system to enforce political control. Some of the abuse even continued to the present day. Historical examples of the abuse of psychiatry took place in [[Nazi Germany]], in the [[Soviet Union]] under [[Psikhushka]], and in the [[apartheid]] system in [[South Africa]]. | + | ==See also== |
| + | * [[Demarcation problem]] | ||
| + | * [[History of science]] | ||
| + | * [[Philosophy of science]] | ||
| + | * [[Objectivity (science)]] | ||
| + | * [[Subjectivity]] | ||
| + | * [[Exact science]] | ||
| + | * [[Paradigm shift]] | ||
| + | * [[Science wars]] | ||
| + | * [[Scientific reductionism]] | ||
| + | * [[The central science]] | ||
| + | * [[Human science]] | ||
| + | * [[Soft computing]] | ||
| + | * [[Memetics]] | ||
| + | * [[Hard systems]], [[soft systems]] | ||
| + | * [[STEM fields]] | ||
| - | [[Electroconvulsive therapy]] (ECT) was one treatment that the anti-psychiatry movement wanted eliminated. They alleged that ECT damaged the brain and was used as a tool for discipline. While some believe there is no evidence that ECT damages the brain, there are some citations that ECT does cause damage. Sometimes ECT is used as punishment or as a threat and there have been isolated incidents where the use of ECT was threatened to keep the patients "in line". The prevalence of psychiatric medication helped initiate [[deinstitutionalization]], the process of discharging patients from psychiatric hospitals to the community. The pressure from the anti-psychiatry movements and the ideology of community treatment from the medical arena helped sustain deinstitutionalization. Thirty-three years after deinstitutionalization started in the United States, only 19% of the patients in state hospitals remained. [[Mental health professional]]s envisioned a process wherein patients would be discharged into communities where they could participate in a normal life while living in a therapeutic atmosphere. Psychiatrists were criticized, however, for failing to develop community-based support and treatment. Community-based facilities were not available because of the political infighting between in-patient and community-based social services, and an unwillingness by social services to dispense funding to provide adequately for patients to be discharged into community-based facilities. | ||
| - | <hr> | ||
| - | [[Ontogeny and Phylogeny (book)]] | ||
| {{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} | ||
Revision as of 17:38, 26 June 2011
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Hard science and soft science are colloquial terms often used when comparing fields of academic research or scholarship, with hard meaning perceived as being more scientific, rigorous, or accurate. Fields of the natural, physical, and computing sciences are often described as hard, while the social sciences and similar fields are often described as soft. The hard sciences are characterized as relying on experimental, empirical, quantifiable data, relying on the scientific method, and focusing on accuracy and objectivity. Publications in the hard sciences such as natural sciences make heavier use of graphs than soft sciences such as sociology, according to the graphism thesis.
See also
- Demarcation problem
- History of science
- Philosophy of science
- Objectivity (science)
- Subjectivity
- Exact science
- Paradigm shift
- Science wars
- Scientific reductionism
- The central science
- Human science
- Soft computing
- Memetics
- Hard systems, soft systems
- STEM fields
Unless indicated otherwise, the text in this article is either based on Wikipedia article "Hard and soft science" or another language Wikipedia page thereof used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License; or on research by Jahsonic and friends. See Art and Popular Culture's copyright notice.
