[OSM-talk] Analysing the OSM community

[Robin Paulson]

On 30 March 2011 01:12, john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I shall simply agree with you that a sociological study based on 16 people
> falls short of accepted scientific study.
>
> My personal view is much of sociology would like to be accepted as science
> but is for the most part subjective.

most sociologists would be horrified by the idea of this kind of work
being accepted as science. qualitative analysis is for the most part a
rejection of the scientific method.

to say it is subjective somewhat misses the point, mainly as this is
such a loaded word according to adherents of the scientific method

> By the way it can be scientific I've worked on a number of Statistics Canada
> surveys were we did interview the required number of people from random
> samples and followed the ideals of the scientific method.

yes, but that would be a quantitative study - a wholly different
approach to studying people, with different intended outcomes (mainly:
testing of theory, rather than generation of theory) and a different
philosophy/ideology

-- 
robin

http://tangleball.org.nz/ - Auckland's Creative Space
http://openstreetmap.org.nz/ - Open Street Map New Zealand
http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/