language for centuries? It has been said that the social sciences are the study of the obvious. Sceptics question their status as sciences. It seems as though much of the terminology and many of the concepts that give them their distinguishing features are words that have been part of the vocabulary of a language for centuries. A few examples are words such as "repression", "sublimation", "rationalization", "customs", "mores", "ethnocentrism", "La Tène" and "palaeolithic". How necessary is this level of specialization given the fact that many of these concepts overlap with more traditional fields of thought?
Do the social sciences lay claim to words and ideas that have been part of a
- Thread starter spanner
- Start date