Math, for instance, is nothing but a set of rules built on top of assumptions.
There's question logicians argue about quite a bit. I would side with folks who view math as nothing but a system for analyzing abstract rule system but which doesn't care at all whether the rules themselves are true or false.
In this sense, math isn't dependent on any assumptions besides the existence of some sort of abstract machine. I know Kurt Godel disagreed with this but it's still complete consistent interpretation of math.
In anycase, this is a bit different from social science, which has to make assumptions every step of the way (not necessary bad but definitely different).
There's question logicians argue about quite a bit. I would side with folks who view math as nothing but a system for analyzing abstract rule system but which doesn't care at all whether the rules themselves are true or false.
In this sense, math isn't dependent on any assumptions besides the existence of some sort of abstract machine. I know Kurt Godel disagreed with this but it's still complete consistent interpretation of math.
In anycase, this is a bit different from social science, which has to make assumptions every step of the way (not necessary bad but definitely different).