In natural sciences, “flat-earthers” have come to symbolize those who simply refuse the scientific method. In spite of the considerable and ever-expanding body of evidence that has come to support the rotundity of the Earth, they stick with the notion that the Earth is flat. They voluntarily regress to a state of knowledge that had previously been abandoned for millennia. However, this deliberate snub concerns only a very small minority in natural sciences.

In human sciences, the community of those who actively turn their back on facts and on the advancement of science, is not a small minority. It is mainstream.

In the realm of human sciences the people who are the equivalent of flat earthers simply dominate. They pay lip service to the scientific method, but everything else indicate that in fact the reality of our human world is indifferent to them. Out of wilful ignorance or simple resignation, they stick with theories that cannot explain reality. They do not seek to learn much further, and select the next generation of scientists among those who limit their studies to the same approaches.

Economics, for instance, the most prestigious field in human sciences, is too often based on one hypothesis only, homo economicus, or utility maximization, which is consensually regarded as deprived of factual basis.

Natural sciences like astronomy, physics, chemistry or biology, are based on unifying, general theories that work as paradigms, research programmes for scientists in the field. By contrast, human sciences have no such unifying factor. They did not have for centuries. They have fragmented to a point were myriads of specialists cannot and often do not want to exchange with anyone outside their narrowly defined sub-subfield.

Factual indifference and absence of common paradigm are reinforcing each other, in a vicious loop.

Over the last half-millennium, our understanding of the nature of our universe has gone through at least 5 paradigm shifts. Scientific exploration has become in the process the very symbol of progress and resilience.

During the same period, our understanding of ourselves, of our human nature, has gone through only one paradigm shift, which almost from the start introduced a problem so fundamental that it compromised, maybe forever, the possibility of another breakthrough. In its present state, human science seems locked in that unique situation in the modern history of science, where a field has almost entirely renounced the possibility of progressing beyond its present state. Little wonder that most people think that human science is no science at all.

A simple comparaison between research budgets allocated to natural and human sciences says it all. When it comes to understanding the mind, economic players spontaneously prefer to refer to neuroscientists, who observe the brain. It is even likely that readers will not easily see the difference between brain and mind.

But there is no reason for this state of affairs to continue indefinitely. Actually, it is certainly not in our collective interest.

There is a way towards human science.

This site is designed to acknowledge, explain and address this situation. It presents a scientific, factual and coherent, explanation of our human world. It is meant as a basis for further exploration. It identifies areas in need of a more ambitious research agenda. It is based on the most advanced observations and theoretical works. And it is open to contributors interested in advancing human science.