Names of places in Croatia

[FlatAssembler]

You don't think about hard and soft sciences? About the philosophy of science?

If you would concentrate on your course of study, you might actually finish school.  Focus dude.

And don't you think it is a lot better to have published some high-quality papers than to have good grades? Is it better to get an A in informatics or to get a C and publish some paper applying informatics to the names of places, like I did?

[FlatAssembler]

You don't think about hard and soft sciences? About the philosophy of science?

I think about those a fair bit, but that wasn’t what you asked.

Boru

Do you think p-values are what makes a science a hard science?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I think about those a fair bit, but that wasn’t what you asked.

Boru

Do you think p-values are what makes a science a hard science?

No.

Boru

[arewethereyet]

If you would concentrate on your course of study, you might actually finish school.  Focus dude.

And don't you think it is a lot better to have published some high-quality papers than to have good grades? Is it better to get an A in informatics or to get a C and publish some paper applying informatics to the names of places, like I did?

Oh, I think it's just dandy that it's taking you twice as long as it should to get through your school program.

You can't seem to make it with mediocre grades.

[FlatAssembler]

Do you think p-values are what makes a science a hard science?

No.

Boru

Then what do you think, are there hard sciences and soft sciences? Or are sciences basically the same in that regard?
I am almost certain there are harder and softer fields of study within sciences. I think that, within linguistics, phonetics is a far harder science than historical phonology is, and that historical phonology is a far harder science than the study of the names of places is.
I also think there are probably harder and softer sciences. Physics presumably being the hardest and history being the softest. I think linguistics is the hardest of the social sciences, harder than sociology and other social sciences.
But I am not sure what makes a science a hard science. What do you think?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

No.

Boru

Then what do you think, are there hard sciences and soft sciences? Or are sciences basically the same in that regard?
I am almost certain there are harder and softer fields of study within sciences. I think that, within linguistics, phonetics is a far harder science than historical phonology is, and that historical phonology is a far harder science than the study of the names of places is.
I also think there are probably harder and softer sciences. Physics presumably being the hardest and history being the softest. I think linguistics is the hardest of the social sciences, harder than sociology and other social sciences.
But I am not sure what makes a science a hard science. What do you think?

I think the distinction between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ sciences is a false one. It’s a traditional nomenclature, nothing more.

Boru

[FlatAssembler]

Then what do you think, are there hard sciences and soft sciences? Or are sciences basically the same in that regard?
I am almost certain there are harder and softer fields of study within sciences. I think that, within linguistics, phonetics is a far harder science than historical phonology is, and that historical phonology is a far harder science than the study of the names of places is.
I also think there are probably harder and softer sciences. Physics presumably being the hardest and history being the softest. I think linguistics is the hardest of the social sciences, harder than sociology and other social sciences.
But I am not sure what makes a science a hard science. What do you think?

I think the distinction between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ sciences is a false one. It’s a traditional nomenclature, nothing more.

Boru

I think it is undeniable that historical phonology is a harder science than etymology is. When doing etymology, you almost always assume that laws of historical phonology are correct. The fact that Latin 's' corresponds to Greek 'h' at the beginning of a word is way more certain than any single etymology that bases itself on it: sex-hex (both meaning six), septem-hepta (both meaning seven), sal-hals (both meaning salt), sol-helios (both meaning sun), sus-hys (both meaning pig, the rare English word swine is from the same root), super-hyper (both meaning above), similis-homoios (both meaning similar), sollus-holos (both meaning whole), silva-hyle (both meaning wood), somnium-hypnos (both meaning sleep), sanguis-haima (both meaning blood), sudor-hidros (both meaning sweat), suavis-hedys (both meaning sweet)... You can be way more certain that Latin 's' corresponds to Greek 'h' at the beginning of the word than that, for example, "sanguis" and "haima" share the same root.
And I think phonetics is an even harder science than historical phonology, because phonetics is not dependent on the relatively vague concept of meaning. There are sound waves, there are their discrete Fourier transformations so that you can see which frequencies are present in that sound wave... There is very little room for subjectivity in phonetics.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I think the distinction between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ sciences is a false one. It’s a traditional nomenclature, nothing more.

Boru

I think it is undeniable that historical phonology is a harder science than etymology is. When doing etymology, you almost always assume that laws of historical phonology are correct. The fact that Latin 's' corresponds to Greek 'h' at the beginning of a word is way more certain than any single etymology that bases itself on it: sex-hex (both meaning six), septem-hepta (both meaning seven), sal-hals (both meaning salt), sol-helios (both meaning sun), sus-hys (both meaning pig, the rare English word swine is from the same root), super-hyper (both meaning above), similis-homoios (both meaning similar), sollus-holos (both meaning whole), silva-hyle (both meaning wood), somnium-hypnos (both meaning sleep), sanguis-haima (both meaning blood), sudor-hidros (both meaning sweat), suavis-hedys (both meaning sweet)... You can be way more certain that Latin 's' corresponds to Greek 'h' at the beginning of the word than that, for example, "sanguis" and "haima" share the same root.
And I think phonetics is an even harder science than historical phonology, because phonetics is not dependent on the relatively vague concept of meaning. There are sound waves, there are their discrete Fourier transformations so that you can see which frequencies are present in that sound wave... There is very little room for subjectivity in phonetics.

That’s nice.

Boru

[FlatAssembler]

I think it is undeniable that historical phonology is a harder science than etymology is. When doing etymology, you almost always assume that laws of historical phonology are correct. The fact that Latin 's' corresponds to Greek 'h' at the beginning of a word is way more certain than any single etymology that bases itself on it: sex-hex (both meaning six), septem-hepta (both meaning seven), sal-hals (both meaning salt), sol-helios (both meaning sun), sus-hys (both meaning pig, the rare English word swine is from the same root), super-hyper (both meaning above), similis-homoios (both meaning similar), sollus-holos (both meaning whole), silva-hyle (both meaning wood), somnium-hypnos (both meaning sleep), sanguis-haima (both meaning blood), sudor-hidros (both meaning sweat), suavis-hedys (both meaning sweet)... You can be way more certain that Latin 's' corresponds to Greek 'h' at the beginning of the word than that, for example, "sanguis" and "haima" share the same root.
And I think phonetics is an even harder science than historical phonology, because phonetics is not dependent on the relatively vague concept of meaning. There are sound waves, there are their discrete Fourier transformations so that you can see which frequencies are present in that sound wave... There is very little room for subjectivity in phonetics.

That’s nice.

Boru

What do you think about this comic:

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That’s nice.

Boru

What do you think about this comic:

I think it’s poorly drawn, unfunny, and is attempting to reinforce a false distinction.

Boru