Just like we've made economics into a heavily statistical "science", yet one half of economists are never in agreement with the other.
Once free human beings and their choices are in the mix, the combinatorics are astronomical and largely beyond science. Then the whole enterprise degrades to the cataloging of noise.
edit: This part is even worse:
"nice money made in business, especially advertising and social computing"
So now we're using the recently cataloged noise-envelope to help corporations extract even more money from the plebes who subsidized the cataloging in the first place?
Just because the economists have been 99 44/100% unsuccessful making their field a meaningful science does not mean that sociology can't make progress as a science. I DID outline some of how might try to do that; I DID see what my wife, Rossi, and Coleman did. I didn't say it would be easy, but I believe it CAN be done.
One of the best reasons for science is the subsequent applied science, and one of the best uses for applied science is making money.
Once free human beings and their choices are in the mix, the combinatorics are astronomical and largely beyond science. Then the whole enterprise degrades to the cataloging of noise.
edit: This part is even worse:
"nice money made in business, especially advertising and social computing"
So now we're using the recently cataloged noise-envelope to help corporations extract even more money from the plebes who subsidized the cataloging in the first place?