print“The social sciences are largely hokum,” asserted one great wit, perhaps the only one on TV.
In this tradition, some “scientists” have decided to reconfirm the trend to which Professor Robert Putnam’s longitudinal studies speak: “For four decades, a gut-level ingredient of democracy – trust in the other fellow – has been quietly draining away.”
These days, only one-third of Americans say most people can be trusted. Half felt that way in 1972, when the General Social Survey first asked the question.
Forty years later, a record high of nearly two-thirds say “you can’t be too careful” in dealing with people.
Dr. Putnam had long ago established that the trend toward distrust is correlated with diversity, and that diversity immiserates—utterly. (His recommendation: enforce it nonetheless. The cuisine is great.)
In diverse communities, Putnam observed, people “hunker down”: they withdraw, have fewer “friends and confidants,” distrust their neighbors regardless of the color of their skin, expect the worst from local leaders, volunteer and carpool less, give less to charity, and “agitate for social reform more,” with little hope of success. They also huddle in front of the television. Activism alternates with escapism, unhappiness with ennui. Trust was lowest in Los Angeles, ‘the most diverse human habitation in human history.'”
This latest nonsense-filled piece features social “scientists” who’ve thrown everything but the kitchen sink at the causality quagmire, when Putnam had already done the necessary legwork on distrust in American democracy.
What we can conclude from this latest iteration in studies tracing the “decline in the nation’s overall trust quotient” is this: the new crop of social “scientists” has not come to terms with the data and deductions produced by the old crop (Putnam).
And that, no doubt, is in support of the great Sheldon Cooper’s opinion about the social sciences: “largely hokum.”