Roberson 1

Erin Roberson
Lucia Elden
English 111
23 October 2015
Sciences in Arms
Anthropology, mathematics, chemistry, sociology and physiology are all high level
science programs. In fact, many prestigious scientists go on
to do amazing research in these fields. However, there is a
growing awareness of the scorn that is directed toward those
in the soft or more social sciences. Jared Diamond is a
professor of physiology and is well known for his Pulitzer
Prize-winning book, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of
Human Societies (1997) where he examines human
development for the last few thousands of years through an
anthropological stance. In his thought-provoking essay
Soft Sciences Are Often Harder than Hard Sciences, he goes in-depth into both sides of the
science community to try to wipe away some of the misconceptions and stigma that are
associated within them.
Diamond wrote this contemplative article in response to a widely discussed attack on a
soft scientist by a hard scientist. Samuel Huntington, a professor of government at Harvard and
president of the American Political Science Association, wrote in a piece of work simply the
correlation found between frustration and instability. In direct response to this work, Serge Lang,
a professor of mathematics at Yale, publicly called out that Huntington's report was nonsense

Roberson 2

because it was something that could not be measured. Lang even goes so far as to question,
Does he have a social-frustration meter? (216). This debate has brought around the question of
whether or not scientist like Huntington, who study social and political sciences, should be
allowed to join or continue their membership in the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).
Diamond uses this one particular example throughout the essay, which enables it to be
more easily understood by the reader. As well as making it easy to follow, he brings up the
reason for writing this paper early on while also asking a question that gets readers involved and
wanting to read more. He queries Do the so called soft sciences, like political science and
psychology, really constitute science at all and do they deserve to stand beside hard sciences,
like chemistry and physics? (216). Next, Diamond continues on in depth to explain some of the
reasons that this question is being brought up. Although some of the writing and explanations are
difficult to follow and understand at times, Diamond quickly makes up for his high level writing
style later by re-explaining and reiterating the same ideas over and over so that the main focus is
never lost.
In an interesting twist, it is learned that Jared Diamond is expert trained in the hard
science of membrane physiology but married to a psychologist. He argues that because of this
he is forced to see the differences between the sciences at a closer range and impact than others.
He makes it very clear from the beginning that he believes that the soft sciences deserve a spot in
the science community and talks at many points that soft sciences actually involve more work
than the hard sciences. He argues:
These soft sciences... are more difficult to study, for obvious reasons. A lion hunt or
revolution in the third world doesnt fit inside a test tube. You cant start it and stop it
whenever you choose. You cant control all the variables...You can still use empirical

Roberson 3

tests to gain knowledge but the types of tests used in the hard sciences must be modified.
Such differences between the hard and soft scientist are regularly misunderstood by hard
scientists, who tend to scorn soft sciences and reserved special contempt for the social
sciences (218).
He is able to effectively reason that both the struggle academically for those pursuing careers in
social and soft sciences as well politically is part of the cause for the hardships in just a few
sentences.
Additionally, Diamond also likes to play to the advantage that he is a scientist and that
the most likely readers are interested in science and the discourse community so he often does
relate examples, as he just did and later on as well, to get his point across. He does an exemplary
job of giving a variety of real life examples that make it more relatable, simpler, and
understandable. A college freshman would have very little struggle understanding the piece, but
only if they are really interested or have some previous knowledge of science. The biggest
struggle would be having an interest in the subject of the piece and being knowledgeable enough
to understand or learn from it. An academic reader, on the other hand, might find this piece to be
a breeze to read. Regardless, it is an entertaining and very educational read for anyone who is
willing to read a few short pages but take in quite a bit of information.

Roberson 4

Works Cited
Diamond, Jared. Soft Sciences Are Often Harder Than Hard Sciences.
Exploring Relationships: Globalization and Learning in the
21st Century. Boston: Pearson Learning Solutions, 2013.
215-221. Print