I hadn’t intended to make a third post on this topic. But for some reason the issue regarding the definition of science that’s been debated in a LinkedIn discussion continues to generate new opportunities to further develop the point. So what follows is a somewhat reworked version of my concluding post there; there’s not much more I can say.
A LinkedIn discussion in the Higher Education Teaching and Learning Group is currently revisiting the perennial question of whether or not fields like psychology, engineering, and medicine ought to be allowed to call themselves “sciences”. This question seems to be of primary interest to those who have some vested interest in discrediting findings emerging from research in these fields,