What have the social sciences actually done to better humanity? Basically all applications of them are either ineffective or malevolent. It does nothing to make man happier or moral. Perhaps it may make government propaganda or advertising more effective, but it always operates on an input -> output model. You show an image or say a word to make people do a thing. I really don't see why this model should be favored over traditional religious modes of thinking. Christianity is the biggest reason why the world has morally progressed beyond India.

@ArdainianRight In academia, especially in recent decades, very little, maybe none.

But in private sectors, and legislation in past decades, there is some good things that came out of it.

Studies of panicked crowds allowed fine-tuning of width of passages in planes and gathering places.
The right width prevents people from getting jammed in passages, and has saved lives on occasion.
The shape of passages, and the choice of doors, can prevent people from getting trampled.

Making areas like airports and trains stations, more intuitively traversable, and speeding things along is another use.
Works amazingly in Japan.
Everything is marked with color and shape, and the colors are chosen such that color blind people can still navigate.
Markings on the floor help you find your way when its crowded, and you can't see signs over the heads of people around you.
Etc...

In the field of law:
"A fool in a hurry" is a standard accepted by most courts on the planet.
It's the reason why you can't have a bottle of bleach have the same shape and color as a soft-drink, and sell those side by side near the register.

All of that is pretty old stuff though, decades old at the latest.

So much of academia these days is corrupt, and the various industries basically have things figured out, as far as benevolent uses of social science is concerned.

@coded_artist
That's the whole problem. The study of herding the masses, even in the rare positive use case, is bad because it's fundamentally dehumanizing. The entire system of modernity is dedicated to optimizing man as a manageable and measurable herd animal, from school to cubicle. Private enterprise being more efficient at it is not a good thing.

@ArdainianRight Similar observations were made in ancient times, whenever large enough crowds of people gathered.

"The Art of War" is an excellent example of social studies applied to military strategy.
With very interesting observations about soldier's morale, the psychology of soldiers and officers, and more.

Beyond a certain number, people become a crowd, not because of some malevolent dehumanization, but because of our cognitive limitations.

Besides, the smallest unit of humanity is not an individual man or woman at all, it's a tribe.
No one lives outside of a society.
We are social animals, and cannot be removed from that context.
We build our individual identities from our associations to groups.
To be part of a group, and be seen as such, isn't dehumanizing, it's an integral part of being human.