Readers' reactions

Last week in The THES

Aidan Foster Carter asked whether social science has a future and why the label provokes anxiety

Darren O'Byrne School of sociology Roehampton Institute

We social scientists have suffered for our name. The inclusion of the word science has produced jibes from supporters of the natural sciences. Economics, politics, sociology and law share a logic that has nothing to do with the (interpretative) logic of the humanities or the (explanatory) logic of the sciences. Our disciplines have at their core an analytical criticism, a pragmatism that recognises "reality" and uses "theory" to understand the lived everyday world. Many of us would welcome suggestions for an alternative name.

Andrew J. Oswald Professor of economics University of Warwick

Those who debate divisions in the social sciences are out of date. Last week I got advice and data from a geographer at Bristol, a psychologist at Sheffield, an organisational behaviourist at Stanford, a sociologist at Essex, a statistician at Manchester and countless economists. Mathematics and modern "micro" data sets are gently producing a new social science where it will not matter if your conference lapel badge falls off in the taxi.

Linda Hadfield Greenscape consulting Bedford

Within the complexities of the modern world, the feedbacks between changes in biophysical, technological and human systems argue for more profound interdisciplinarity between the natural as well as the social sciences. Problems such as the recent BSE crisis illustrate that boundaries between different areas of inquiry must be broken down.