Thanks. I'm with you that Bloomfield's arguments seem wrong. There's a real value to "fuzzy" science beyond hard numbers and facts.

Don't confuse cult of personality with interest in the actual subject matter

indeed. Now, I'll admit that I'm skimming and only half-listening ... but does Bloomfield keep proposing that people can be as statistically

calculated as say ... accounting?

in other words ... is he saying that people are as cold, hard, & predictable as chemical interactions and numerical calculations?

of course anthropology is a touchy subject. lot of our conceptions of world is based on it.

it's a worrying trend. Neuroscience has "hardened up" and now concludes we don't actually exist. *shrugs*

LOL @ Nanner