The analogy is weak, I admit. I meant that Heidegger's project(s) -- of which I am a fan -- offers nothing for social science. You can't base a sociology or anthropology on Sein und Zeit.
-- ravi ravi at platosbeard.org
I am not sure where you are going with this analogy... Newton's work was empirically and mathematically grounded science (whatever his other beliefs might have been). Freud and Marx (at least in some versions) [thought they] were inventing a new science... whether they are a science remains to be seen, IMHO. Heidegger (of whom you know a lot more than I do) seems to have been concerned with separating thinking (a profoundly human activity) and science.
--ravi
P.S: given all my prior rants about "science", I should clarify that I am using "science" here in the traditional sense