Inspired by another thread !ifrickinglovescience
What's your definition of "real science?" It's not clear what "real science" or even "the scientific method" refers to because the methods employed by scientists are actually quite heterogeneous. For example, is science all about "making testable predictions in advance of falsifying observations?" Well, what about astronomy and anatomy, where a lot of "science" is just... brute empiricism (also known as "just looking").
A lot of psychology is just looking. For example, developmental psychologists watch babies grow up and notice all sorts of interesting things and then just... write them down. For instance, did you know that 3 month old infants will look surprised when they see the law of object permanence violated? Apparently babies come into the world with some organization in advance of experience that allows them to grasp basic physical principles and build up expectations about how objects will behave based on their experiences.
I like what you pointed out that we just have to look sometimes, but it falls apart because of one simple reason... reproducibility. Does the heart always pump blood? Yes, unless the person is dead of course. About 5 liters apparently. This uniformity, this measurement, the near infinitel reproducibility of this observation I would say does make it real science.
What's the difference between you and everyone else who has just started learning about a topic and immediately thinks they know everything about it?
Plus, like, if you think the phrase 'the research suggests' is unscientific I am unsure as to what you think science actually is. You'll find that phrase in papers for every scientific discipline; it's a very scientific phrase. What is the problem here?
https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/82uefr/cmv_psychology_is_not_a_real_science_and_its/
I think psych as a field is still represented in media by therapy, which is super stigmatized and has an unfortunate history. It is irritating when other science people dismiss psych, because we literally use the same scientific method.
The hard science in Physics in the early stages is based on simple mathematical relationships such as F=ma . This is also easily shown via experiment to be true and is also shown to be correct astronomically throughout the universe.
The hard science in psychology is one of a more statistical nature and also must contain many assumptions. It is more difficult to understand to the layman.
!mathematics thoughts on that?
https://old.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/kz43n/dear_reddit_do_you_think_psychology_is_a_science/
I had PTSD. Shit is crazy. Mental illness and the treatments..therapy tactics and meds are very real. I had textbook PTSD and textbook treatment
What are thoughts dramanauts?
What is psychology?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Genuinely crazy how little scientists know about what science is. STEMlords are just irredeemably stupid, they should all be forced to take mandatory philosophy classes until they manage to pass one.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Philosophy is the gayest most pedantic thing on earth. During covid you r-slurred butt BIPOCs finally had moral quandries to solve left right and center. Instead of standing up and saying " these are philosophical questions about ethics and we will find an answer" you let r-slurred BIPOC pretend that science makes value statements. I had to listen to people say "science says we should do x".
That was your chance to matter and you guys continued to be useless. I had to explain to r-slurs that valuing "life years" was a biased decision and not inherent to science. That was your guys job.
Useless butt piece of shit.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm not a philosopher u dumb r-slur my research is firmly on the science side of covid.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Then shut up about philosophy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That's what my colleagues keep saying
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Philosophers never actually do anything, they only influence people who actually do stuff
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
!codecels
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
There'd be mass bombings.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!accelerationists
Make mandatory philosophy classes part og high school now
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Aren't there already mandatory ethics modules for codecels?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
My Uni requires one lecture per course. They send some literal r-slur to lecture you on "ethics" (read: why capitalism is bad) while they entirely misunderstand what the class is about. If you question any point they make, the lecturer will just concede that ethics is subjective and that they're only there to "make you think"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
It should be a class on the philosophy of software freedom
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The software wants to be free!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
if it makes codecels suffer, i am for it
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
No thank you, we don't need midwits getting high off their own big brained philosophy takes
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
You are gay and a BIPOC
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Okay and?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
It should be impossible to fail a philosophy class when the answer to every question is there is no objectively correct answer. Philosophycels always think they're so smart for repeating what someone smarter than them said 2000 years ago instead of coming up with answers themselves
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
On philosophy tests I've taken, I had to defend my position according to established categories of thought and say why I liked and disliked each category
and everything unique is "oh you're just reinventing the skocretaire arguement which is a combination of blagaboogatarianism and spagetto perspective... if you had read your text book you would know that
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
This is so immensely stupid it just proves my point. STEMcels try not to be sub 80 IQ r-slurs challengr IMPOSSIBLE
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Name a single philosophical question that has an objectively correct answer
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Most of them? If not, how could we do science? How could we learn anything about the world?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
By doing math and research that have nothing to do with philosophy?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
How do you justify the methods of your research? How do you know it tells you "the truth"?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Because it's backed up by data, observations, and calculations, not abstract philosophical thought experiments
And before you ask how do we know how much evidence is enough, that comes back to my original comment that there is no objectively correct answer. Scientists debate all the time whether theories have enough evidence
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That's such a stupid answer again, MANDATORY PHILOSOPHY CLASSES FOR STEMCELS NOW!
How do you justify that "data, observations, and calculations" point us at the truth?
Says who? Is it objectively correct that there's no objectively correct answer? What does "objectively correct" even mean?
How do you know something like "is murder wrong?" doesn't have an objectively correct answer? Because people disagree? People disagree about literally everything!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Are you in psychology
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No, I wish I was in a field with real people and not a hard science (they are all populated with the most braindead r-slurs)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I sometimes think the same but I've seen what happens when projects switch from sourcing patients from clinicians to self diagnosed people from twitter. I can't imagine being in a field where everything is collected through surveys
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Every empirical field is DOOMED tbh we should just be sitting still and thinking all day.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Philosophy is logic based which puts it adjacent to math
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Especially predicate and sentential calculus
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Correct. We need 15 credits of Marxist theory inshallah
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Everyone knows that science is the platonic search for empirical truth, but not everyone has the capacity to value that search more than getting laid+paid
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
what is science
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
THIS IS WHAT MOST SCIENTISTS ACTUALLY BELIEVE LOL
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!nooticers
is that a surprise for you guys?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Women go into the field with the primary goal to "fix themselves" and then failing that, be very trained gaslampers.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
so thats why everything "psychologists" say is bat-shit crazy and inconsistent.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Literally every one of my childhood friend's mums who got divorced decided to study psychology for some reason
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Psychology used to be a masculine field when we were doing the Stanford prison excitement and John Calhoun's behavior modification. When all that stuff became unethical all the chads left it
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Harlow's monkeys
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
If it wasn't for women the poor would be in skinner boxes where they have to run on a treadmill to generate power and after 10 hours they get a bump of cocaine
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Psychology is just, like, vibes
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I wonder why 75% of of therapists promote acceptance instead of accountability.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Black
Science 
man kawaii 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Psychoanalysis isn't science and that's a good thing.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I liked the way Feynman put it.
It's not a science because it does not deal with measurable, quantifiable phenomena and has no reproducibility potential, but just as with something like ancient medicine, there is circumstantial evidence to show that it works sometimes and having something work sometimes is better than nothing. Thus while it is not a science and there isn't a sound theory, it shouldn't be completely dismissed
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
There's probably some experiments you could run that would be reproducible but regrettably we consider them "unethical" and "wrong" so we can't run them.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You're probably thinking of neuroscience
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Neuroscience is the fricking real science behind psychology and we know absolutely none of it, I took some neuroscience classes in college and half of neuro 101 was fricking "this happens but we don't know why."
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Sounds like every science tbqhwy
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
my favorite is that a lot of the antipsychotic drugs theubdont know how it works and basically admit that not enough reseaech has been done on them butt they perscribe them like candy. Marijuana by comparison hasnt had enough research on it even though its been in use for thousands of years, butt thats a good thing bc pot heads are lazy/dont wash they peepee
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
same is true for electroshock therapy
they realized that zapping peoples brains made them feel better
why? no one knows
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Hopefully in the near future
neuroscience and philosophy 
of mind replace psychology.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The black box problem is massive for neuro. Right now the best we have is hehe look at these antigens they are pretty colors :) but since so much of psychology is "thinking" we are very far away from drowning in the tub like a Texas mama
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
X doubt. Another issue with these experiments is they stop being reproducible when the subjects are aware of them. Suddenly when people know how you expect them to act they might act differently
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Behaviorism was scientific. But also very neurodivergent. Companies use it to make money, but psychcels don't like to talk about it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yea I had this thought once too. As weird as it seems, there is probably not a single positive thing to come out from us learning more about behavioral patterns and group psychology. Instead it always seems to loop around to population control, be it intentional or not. Whether this says anything about the field itself or more so about its applications or human nature, that I do not know
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
we should have psychologists figure out which one it is
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
That is entirely too evenhanded and fair a take for /r/drama. How dare you.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Oh don't worry I haven't actually read the post. I just instinctively reacted to the title
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
From the op:
Sounds like a reproducible statement to me.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Was he as charitable with his opinion on religion?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't know, I never considered him an authority on that subject so I really have no idea what his opinions were
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
What's the scientific reason for this much fluff
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Sheep have been bred to be that wooly over many generations.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That's a cat
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
it has more sheep-like properties than cat-like properties though
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
As I learned in graduate school - no it's a psuedoscience.
There I saved you $155k.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
The only thing shrinks should
be doing is teaching people how the mind works, what emotions are, and how you can remind your brain 
that "you" are the captain 
of the ship. Anxiety 
is just an alert 
from your brain 
because it sees a pattern that is concerning and is firmly requesting your attention 
on the matter 
to asses whether you are in danger 
or not.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Tbf brain imaging techniques are what, 70 years old? It took physics, crown jewel of sciences, the millenia from Aristotle to Newton. I feel like it's stuck in it's thermodynamics phase, making quantitative measurements/models of macroscopic phenomenon but still missing that physical mechanistic ontology that Stat mech brought later.
Eventually we will effectively map brain states and neurochemistry to psychological states and/or build a physical model of consciousness, which I believe is what cognitive neuroscience and psycophysics are doing right now. Eventually psychology might be treated like thermo, a historical thing with metaphors of engines and such before getting to the more fundamental Stat mech that recapitulates previous results with more powerful cowtools
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
There is no hard aspect of psychology because its too politically motivated im sure we could do enough brain scans to find out if trans really have the a brain in the wrong body but even the idea of proving something so key to modern politics is dangerous. As would being able to filter actually mentally ill people from fakers so you can just sell everyone therapy and meds.
The medical sciences are increasingly seeking empirical individualized treatments yet psychologists are perfectly happy to push drugs that have wildly inconsistent results and that we dont even understand (the serotonin theory of Depression is under heavy fire and barely substantiated so psychcels cope "it works but we dont know why!!").
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
this is why I cant trust it, and this attitude seems to be leaking into medicine. Sad
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
No we couldn't lol. We know practically nothing about how the brain actually works and even if we did, a ct scan doesn't have nearly enough detail to show anything psychological
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
We know why, the placebo effect
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ssris have like a 50& success rate
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Then why does it have a stronger effect than placebo?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
psychoanalysis is definitely real, but it's the closest thing I know of to an irl infohazard.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
you're an r-slured bipoc
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
psychoanalysis is just interrogation for people too kitty to admit it's interrogation. If you can resist one you can the other
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Real science that is not being practiced.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
reverse psychology
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
When I was in college I had to participate in some arbitrary number of hours as a research subject in order to graduate
So I just did a ton of surveys for the psych department because it was the easiest possible way
90% of the time they would give you some question like "on a scale of 1-10 how [x] do you feel right now" and repeat it after you were exposed to some stimulus or did some basic task
Obviously the data is completely subjective and easily skewed by bored participants just clicking five for everything and moving on, but they would analyze it and pretend it had statistical value (we're totally a hard science guys
)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Don't they consider Karl Marx the father of the discipline?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That's sociology, and he's considered one of the three fathers along Max Weber and Émile Durkheim
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Mr. Shill, are there any sociologists whose work is actually interesting or useful?
Or is it all just "economics but somehow even worse"?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't know much about sociology, the only psychology/sociology book I read was "Thinking, fast and slow" by Daniel Kahneman (nobel prize in economics) which is a study on biases based on his experiments and it was good. Even Nassim Taleb recommended it (and he loathes psychologists and psychology in general).
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Psychology is fricking real science but we're in the fricking four humors stage of it, if not earlier.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Psychology exists to tell bad faith chudposters they are wrong because the science says so
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Philosophy is applied sociology
Sociology is applied Psychology
Psychology is applied biology
Biology is applied chemistry
Chemistry is applied physics
Physics is applied mathematics
Mathematics is applied theology
Theology is appled philosophy and so on
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Except this stops at mathematics and theologists go back to being r-slurs and politicians
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Except it actually stops at physics becaus math is just something we invented to explain shit in the real world. 90% of the shit mathematicians do is pointless made up bulshit
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Mathematics is fricking applied philosophy is fricking applied theology is fricking applied schizophrenia is fricking applied autism, autism is the fricking source of all scientific knowledge.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
It is and the only reason people think it's not is because you're not allowed to talk about the parts of it that are real.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Psychology is not a real science. Economics is also the hardest "applied psychology discipline" and it's predictive power is still weak and poorly understood
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
This guy has never heard of a soft science
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Downmarseying snappy is a bannable offence
Snapshots:
https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/17010n5/cmv_most_of_psychology_is_not_a_real_science_yet/:
undelete.pullpush.io
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/82uefr/cmv_psychology_is_not_a_real_science_and_its/:
undelete.pullpush.io
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
https://old.reddit.com/r/AcademicPsychology/comments/gb0pql/what_are_the_common_arguments_against_psychology/:
undelete.pullpush.io
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
https://old.reddit.com/r/askpsychology/comments/wyut6j/why_is_psychology_not_seen_as_a_science_by_many/:
undelete.pullpush.io
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Some parts of psychology like psychophysics are science. Others are not.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
You get a Bachelor of Arts if you get a 4-year degree in psychology which makes it not a science, end of discussion
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context