I think: Both natural sciences and social sciences are important for human survival in the present era, and they play different but complementary roles in addressing various aspects of human well-being and sustainability. In real meaning, neither natural sciences nor social sciences can be considered more important than the other for human survival. They are interdependent and must work together to address the complex challenges faced by humanity in the present era. An integrated approach that combines insights from both fields is essential for sustainable development and the well-being of current and future generations.
Natural Sciences: Natural sciences, including biology and physics, provide knowledge about the physical world and help us address environmental challenges like climate change and disease control.
Social Sciences: Social sciences, such as sociology and economics, focus on human behavior and societal issues, enabling us to understand and tackle complex problems like poverty, inequality, and education.
Points:
Natural sciences are vital for understanding the natural world and developing technologies.
Social sciences provide insights into human behavior, shaping policies and institutions. An integrated approach, combining both fields, is essential for addressing today's multifaceted challenges.
In my view: The value of social sciences and natural sciences cannot be definitively compared in a way that declares one as intrinsically more valuable than the other. Both fields have their unique contributions and play crucial roles in our understanding of the world and are valuable in their own right and have unique contributions to our understanding of the world. Their relative importance can vary depending on the specific question, problem, or context being addressed. Ultimately, a holistic approach that integrates knowledge from both fields can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of complex issues and challenges facing our world.
If we want to prefer “Social sciences or Natural sciences”, we should notice that: Each of these fields serves distinct purposes and addresses different aspects of our world. The preference should be based on the specific questions or challenges at hand. For example, when addressing environmental conservation, natural sciences provide essential insights into ecosystems and biodiversity, while social sciences help us understand the human behaviors and policies impacting conservation efforts. In medical research, natural sciences offer crucial insights into diseases and treatments, while social sciences help us navigate the complexities of healthcare systems and patient behavior. Therefore, the preference should be for an interdisciplinary approach that recognizes the value of both fields and leverages their strengths to create a more holistic understanding of the issues we face in our ever-evolving world.
It wouldn't be scientifically accurate to pose this as a disjunctive question, as both natural and social sciences are essential for different aspects of human survival. The importance of one over the other may vary depending on the specific context and the challenges that need to be addressed. In reality, an interdisciplinary approach that integrates insights from both natural and social sciences is often necessary to tackle complex global issues effectively.
My question was, if someone has to select an option, what should he do?
Both natural sciences and social sciences are continuing side by side for human survival and welfare, i.e., one integrate the other. So, we can not discriminate which is more important. Life is a creative process and depends on all scientific fields to keep on in straight ways.