Answer:
Social sciences (e.g., economics and psychology) are just as scientific as natural sciences (e.g., physics and biology). The difference is not in quality, but in what is studied and the limitations imposed by studying that. For example,
Subatomic particles are very well-behaved and easy to manage compared to economies and human minds. This makes it much easier to control studies and experiments of natural phenomena than social phenomena.
Ethically, we cannot experimentally manipulate humans or human activities as much as we can experimentally manipulate particles, atoms, molecules. This imposes challenges on social scientists’ methods that are not imposed on natural scientists’ methods.
So social scientists must do science differently than physicists. But both sets of scientists obtain and analyze novel data to test hypotheses about their domain. So they’re both doing science. It’s just that natural scientists’ encounter fewer ethical and logistical challenges than social scientists.
Hope it helps
Please mark me as the brainliest
Thank you
Answer:
my friend Josh to meet me at the beach
Answer:
to around be around to kill hom
Bradbury describes Mildred’s earbuds as seashells. He uses this metaphor in a reference as people hold a seashell up to one’s ear to hear the sound of the ocean.
This should alarm the reader because the <em>seashells are used by Montag’s society to control information and control potential rebellions</em>. This is a way to control individuals and paint a different reality. Also with the seashells always plugged in <em>people don’t have the time or a silence to listen to their own thoughts.</em>
