I was thinking that we discuss societal behaviours quite a lot in Politics and was thinking might it be useful to have a distinct Sociology category for when people want to talk about social behaviour that is distinct from a governance perspective ie outside of political concerns and non-partisan?. Perhaps put it in the section where Politics is.

Edited December 10, 20196 yr by StringJunky

That would also be a good place for the recently suggested thread conspiracy theories and how social media help spread them.

20 minutes ago, Strange said:

That would also be a good place for the recently suggested thread conspiracy theories and how social media help spread them.

That's what inspired me. As far as referred authorities and decision-making suggestions go it should generally be limited to the relevant expert authorities, which may be government departments but not politicians... the scientists/researchers/civil servants etc themselves. In a nutshell: apolitical discussion of societal behaviour.

Edited December 10, 20196 yr by StringJunky

For now, there's a lot of overlap with general psychology and it could potentially live here: https://www.scienceforums.net/forum/23-psychiatry-and-psychology/

TBF, the forum names here are a bit of a mess so it would not matter much if it gets sorted into something that already exists. Alternative a broader social science section could be established.

11 minutes ago, iNow said:

For now, there's a lot of overlap with general psychology and it could potentially live here: https://www.scienceforums.net/forum/23-psychiatry-and-psychology/

I think they are too formal and the subject matter envisaged would muddy them. That's why I suggested close to politics. The subject matter is a softer science quality than psychology, rather like in politics but without the partisanship. Political discussion often ends up discussing matters that transcends it but not formal enough for a psychological/psychiatric discussion. Discussion of such matters in politics always ends up, naturally, seeking a political solution as opposed to other potential apolitical solutions.

Edited December 10, 20196 yr by StringJunky

19 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I think they are too formal and the subject matter envisaged would muddy them. That's why I suggested close to politics. The subject matter is a softer science quality than psychology, rather like in politics but without the partisanship. Political discussion often ends up discussing matters that transcends it but not formal enough for a psychological/psychiatric discussion. Discussion of such matters in politics always ends up, naturally, seeking a political solution as opposed to other potential apolitical solutions.

Very well said. Completely agree. On another note, I had to try really hard resisting the urge to suggest that some of our political discussion participants would be PERFECT fits for psychiatric discussion, but alas... I would never stoop so low as to make such a cheap joke.

1 minute ago, iNow said:

Very well said. Completely agree. On another note, I had to try really hard resisting the urge to suggest that some of our political discussion participants would be PERFECT fits for psychiatric discussion, but alas... I would never stoop so low as to make such a cheap joke.

Naughty.