But what can you possible say, by looking at something like brain functions, about... let's use the same example here, a relationship between teacher and students? You always need meanings to make sense of events. If you are studying brain functions only, you probably wouldn't need to think about what it means (I bed you still do...) but any kind of science and logics are always associated with human reasonings.
If you don't know about OUR methodologies, we don't just believe word to word of an interview data or the result of questionnaires. For example, there is a methodology called triangulation in sociology. We search for evidences to check the validity of interpretation of the raw data, using as "empirical" evidences as possible.
Plus, science has made people believe that everything is in our brain... and I think a lot of people believe that science of human-being is all sorted out by studying nervous system or biological composition of our body... psychology had so much influence by those scientific views too.
But it's becoming to be doubted to see human-beings in that way, and within the last decades, the importance of environmental stimulus have been studied as triggers of human behaviors. What we do cannot necessarily be explained by measuring stuff inside of us.
For example, people thought that babies learn to walk at a certain point and the process of walking is designed by genes in a universal developmental process of human beings. After a baby start moving its legs, while still lying upwards, there is a certain point when it loses the movement and become still until it starts clawing on the floor. And it's been believed that those phases are genetically determined.
Of course certain movements become able supported by development of muscles and bones, but as the body weight of a baby increases, the movement is restricted and even with the physical abilities, it "seems" like they stop moving their legs for some developmental reasons. But when researchers put some equipments on babies to help reduce the weight (gravity is working as an environmental factor) on legs, they start moving their legs again... and with something to step on (environmental factor) (e.g. treadmill), they learn to walk faster than it's been expected for long.
It's all interactive...
The example above is "scientific", but this is something studied in a field of "psychology" as well... my point is that we do examine more than what's called subjective, in order to figure out factors working behind human behaviors. And I feel like it's all the name of academic principles that's bothering you to think that "other than science"" is fuzzy and and not valuable.
