There is a Sociology proposal on Area 51.

Given how difficult it is to successfully build a site, and we are lacking on our question rate.

enter image description here

Given we have a social-psychology tag and there are questions that overlap Sociology and Psychology, should we increase our site definition to include Sociology?

Linked with Should Sociology be merged with Cognitive Sciences? on Area 51

3 Answers 3


I think we had a bit of a discussion here about whether sociology is on topic. @Artem's answer was the most upvoted:

The OP has to explain why a psychologist, psychiatrist, cognitive scientist, neuroscientist or other cognitive sciences professional would be interested in the question.

Sociology is pretty broad. I'd be wary of making the site too diffuse in its focus.

  • 1
    And why an Android developer would be interested in a question regarding optimising an Oracle database?
    – o0'.
    Commented Nov 14, 2013 at 15:14

I'm all for the inclusion of sociology (and ethnology, by the way). This could become a human sciences site, and get a new name like "humanities.SE".

Sites like Stackoverflow are incredibly broad in scope, in fact it is incredibly difficult to post a software-related question that is offtopic there.

I think that most psychologists and cognitive scientists have a much too narrow perspective and limited methodology in their research. We want to understand human behavior, how can we exclude other disciplines that deal with the same questions, and still believe we are getting a clear picture? In the course of its establishment as a separate discipline, psychology has cut itself off from philosophy, pedagogy and sociology. Now that psychology has a stable standing, it is time to re-connect and integrate the disparate perspectives.


I understand that the was the original premise of the site was for cognitive sciences. I am wondering if it would be valuable to the Sociology proposal and our site to merge them, which would considerably broaden the scope. Would this really be a bad thing?

I quote from my edited Area 51 question:

I've edited this to make this question broader, as there are a few areas here that may be successfully merged and take the strain off splintered communities trying to get site proposals to beta and then to graduate.

Down the track when there is a thriving graduated site, perhaps dividing them could be an option. But this is so far down the track, I believe it could be a more vibrant and dynamic way for improving participation on the [se] sites, allowing users to Q&A their interests and expertise, and add some interest and life to some beta sites that may be lagging and a little stale perhaps.

A merger would help deal with this question:
Encouraging voting and posting on beta

You must log in to answer this question.