In the article at the beginning of the readings book, Aronson talks about Social Psychology as a leap of faith, and about the imperfect nature of social psychological experiments (which is true of science in all domains). In the last chapter of the book, Aronson talks about Social Psychology as a science. What implications does the imperfect nature of this type of research have for social psychological science? How can these two competing views (by the same person) be reconciled? Can an area of study be both a leap of faith and a science? Is social psychology the only scientific area in which this contradiction occurs?