I've written earlier an answer to Thomas Chr. Wyller where I've mentioned the new sciences of social science, political science and psychology and in this regard made a somewhat derogatory comment that I don't think they exist for real. Now, the further notion on this is, to clarify, that this notion refers to the nomothetical sense of science compared to the classical notions of physics should be uncontroversial. It's my opinion that when you transfer much of the cognitive "laws" of psychology to neurology of medicine, little of psychology remains. Psychology remains even today a step out on the branch of science from the hard sciences of physics, chemistry and possibly up to biology, including bio-chemistry. However, today, being progress or not, I don't have the slightest doubt over the notion of new sciences as sciences in the descriptive sense, that is, the respective descriptions of the new sciences are completely valid science if you just change the description according to HDM a little, no matter how weird this may sound, I think there's no problem in doing this (as well as with much or all of the humanistic disciplines). Cheers!
From my blog, http://blog.t-lea.net/.
It can be fun to build these descriptions together, if you want to. Regardless, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this!
Cheers!
