Aren't all sciences were born from philosophy? Graduating from the journey of understanding the meaning of something and graduating to measuring it to further understand why the world works the way it works?
Social sciences, economics, and medicine are relatively immature (hundreds of years versus thousands) compared to the hard sciences. These fields all apply the scientific method to the best degree available and the subject matter is pretty complex therefore results are difficult to reproduce. They could do a better job at self-regulation, but maybe that's part of its maturation process.
Humans with their personalities and motivations are harder to "science".
Yes, I would say that science is a branch of epistemology that uses evidence to generate knowledge to increase predictive power. I think the difference between hard and soft sciences is just how tangible your predictions are.
Soft fields are definitely harder to research, but instead of acknowledging this, many soft researchers ignore epistemological limits to make their research sound ‘harder.’
A good example is this psych researcher deriving equations of emotion based on fluid mechanics [O]. Somehow people in these fields don’t understand and/or care and allow this bullshit to continue.
I think many or most soft research programs are currently in “degenerate” territory (Lakotos)
Social sciences, economics, and medicine are relatively immature (hundreds of years versus thousands) compared to the hard sciences. These fields all apply the scientific method to the best degree available and the subject matter is pretty complex therefore results are difficult to reproduce. They could do a better job at self-regulation, but maybe that's part of its maturation process.
Humans with their personalities and motivations are harder to "science".