User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 53

  1. #31
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Scheherezade View Post
    you can scientifically study almost everything, even religion
    Gosh, this is a nice New Age idea. But without the Periodic Table we wouldn't have the science of Chemistry, and without Natural Selection we wouldn't have the science of Biology, and without Quantum Mechanics we wouldn't have the science of Physics, and without Relativity we wouldn't have the science of Astronomy.

    Psychology has nothing like any of these basic scienfic facts, and religion has nothing like these basic scientific facts. So the emperors of Psychology and Religion have no clothes.

  2. #32
    Senior Member Scheherezade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    156

    Default

    )))) it`s strange that it made you think of "New Age ideas", maybe you`re reading more into this than it really is,
    so you`re saying that you exclude any scientific principle that might be attributed to psychology? if that is the case, what is there left?


    i am really curious, please indulge me

  3. #33
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scheherezade View Post
    )))) it`s strange that it made you think of "New Age ideas", maybe you`re reading more into this than it really is,
    so you`re saying that you exclude any scientific principle that might be attributed to psychology? if that is the case, what is there left?


    i am really curious, please indulge me
    Just compare in your own mind the sciences I have mentioned below with Psychology and it becomes plain Psychology is not a science. It has no grounding facts like the Periodic Table, Natural Selection, Quantum Mechanics or Relativity.

    Psychology claims to be a science, just as Christian Science by Mary Baker Eddy claims to be a science, for status.

    How can you let yourself be fooled?

  4. #34
    Senior Member Scheherezade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Just compare in your own mind the sciences I have mentioned below with Psychology and it becomes plain Psychology is not a science. It has no grounding facts like the Periodic Table, Natural Selection, Quantum Mechanics or Relativity.

    Psychology claims to be a science, just as Christian Science by Mary Baker Eddy claims to be a science, for status.

    How can you let yourself be fooled?
    what would you better define it then?

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    ^ Don't sign up for college courses in psych, @Mole, you'll be dismayed by Research Methods, Neuroscience, Abnormal, and any hardlining science-oriented profs you meet along the way. I've been over experimental design and "correlation does not imply causation" more times than I can count. True that psych is not always a hard science, but sometimes it is. Counseling, I think, is more of an art.



    Honestly, I'd be surprised if it wasn't way higher than that. There aren't exactly myriad options for a recent grad with a bachelor's in psych.

    I also think that there is a huge difference between the students who are psych majors and the students who are PSYCH MAJORS, if you understand what I mean - those kids who are REALLY INTO PSYCH and do psych club and become officers in the psych honor society and do lots of research and take on several internships and develop close relationships with their professors and get glowing recommendations and 4.0 major GPAs and so on. I think most of those kids go right into grad school to become counselors, clinicians, or researchers. I do know some people who did get career employment straight out of undergrad - a case manager, many teachers, an academic enrichment specialist, staff at a nonprofit home for abused children, a shelter manager.

    But psych is a notoriously popular major, and I think it draws a lot of otherwise-undecided students because it sits at a nice midline between the hard sciences and the humanities, it's fairly useful in any future endeavor, and it typically doesn't have incredibly extensive prereqs and labs and maths. For someone who hasn't figured out their career path by the time they need to select a major, it's a sensible choice especially when looking at flexibility down the road, as it's a reasonably useful precursor to management, social work, teaching, allied health, HR, admin, marketing/advertising, sales, criminal justice, and law. My guess is the majority of psych majors 6 months out of school are working on their next path, whatever that may be. For many of us, college was a lot more about learning how to live than about learning our careers. I wouldn't have necessarily chosen it that way, but I don't regret how things have unfolded.
    This was my experience but I wish it hadnt been, I'd love to go to study once more and if I ever won the lottery I think I'd do that.

  6. #36
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Exactly, Psychology has no claim to be a science.
    Of course it does, when we are in the subfields studying neurons, brain chemistry, behavior, and other empirically-measurable components. But the mind and brain overlap... our thoughts change our body chemistry and our body chemistry changes our thoughts.

    Psychology is a wide field of study, not a singular discipline claiming complete objectivity. Some subfields are hard science, like neuroscience and behavior. Others are not. But if psychology laid no claim to having some scientific elements at all, we would be missing a huge piece of the picture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole
    It has no grounding facts like the Periodic Table, Natural Selection, Quantum Mechanics or Relativity.
    It does: the biochemical basis of the structure of neurons, neurotransmitters, the nervous system and its divisions; types of behavioral conditioning (classical/operant); elements of cognition (memory, learning, probelm-solving), and more.

    Those are limited, of course. We can't - at least not yet - empirically measure much about consciousness and unconsciousness as perceived by our minds. It doesn't make psychology any less of a respectable discipline. It is not the discipline's fault, nor the fault of its students, either, that we cannot make it a science alone. We just have to be very up front and clear about where it is objectively scientific and where it cannot be.

    Personality is not a science, of course.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark
    This was my experience but I wish it hadnt been, I'd love to go to study once more and if I ever won the lottery I think I'd do that.
    Yes... I am currently back in school for the other experience. It's very different. More productive and perhaps more satisfying, but less exploratory and fun!

  7. #37
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Scheherezade View Post
    what would you better define it then?
    Perhaps if we start with the word itself 'psychology' meaning the study of the psyche. And as psyche means soul, psychology means the study of the soul.

    And as religion has lost status psychology has filled the vacuum.

    Psychology recognises this loss of status of religion and so it seeks to shore up its own status by claiming to be a science.

    Many of us seek status, and as that is less availble in religion, we seek status in the pseudo scientific religion called psychology.

  8. #38
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529
    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    Of course it does, when we are in the subfields studying neurons, brain chemistry, behavior, and other empirically-measurable components. But the mind and brain overlap... our thoughts change our body chemistry and our body chemistry changes our thoughts.

    Psychology is a wide field of study, not a singular discipline claiming complete objectivity. Some subfields are hard science, like neuroscience and behavior. Others are not. But if psychology laid no claim to having some scientific elements at all, we would be missing a huge piece of the picture.



    It does: the biochemical basis of the structure of neurons, neurotransmitters, the nervous system and its divisions; types of behavioral conditioning (classical/operant); elements of cognition (memory, learning, probelm-solving), and more.

    Those are limited, of course. We can't - at least not yet - empirically measure much about consciousness and unconsciousness as perceived by our minds. It doesn't make psychology any less of a respectable discipline. It is not the discipline's fault, nor the fault of its students, either, that we cannot make it a science alone. We just have to be very up front and clear about where it is objectively scientific and where it cannot be.

    Personality is not a science, of course.



    Yes... I am currently back in school for the other experience. It's very different. More productive and perhaps more satisfying, but less exploratory and fun!
    A science has a theory and makes accurate predictions. Psychology neither has a theory nor does it make accurate predictions.

    And those who want to believe in psychology deploy special pleading.

  9. #39
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    A science has a theory and makes accurate predictions. Psychology neither has a theory nor does it make accurate predictions.

    And those who want to believe in psychology deploy special pleading.
    So, do you not consider psychological studies like these to be science?

    Quote Originally Posted by University of Notre Dame Department of Psychology
    In a new study published recently in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, University of Notre Dame psychology researchers Jessica Payne and Alexis Chambers found that people who experienced rapid eye movement (REM) sleep soon after being presented with an emotionally-charged negative scene—a wrecked car on a street, for example—had superior memory for the emotional object compared to subjects whose sleep was delayed for at least 16 hours.

    This increased memory for the emotional object corresponded with a diminished memory for the neutral background of the scene, such as the street on which the wrecked car was parked.

    These results suggest that the sleeping brain preserves in long-term memory only those scenes that are emotionally salient and aid in adaptation.

    “Our results suggest that REM sleep, which has long been thought to play a role in emotional processing and emotional memory, helps us selectively preserve in memory only what is most important and perhaps beneficial to survival,” says Payne, assistant professor and Nancy O’Neill Collegiate Chair in Psychology, who specializes in sleep’s impact on memory, creativity, and the ability to process new ideas.

  10. #40
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529
    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    So, do you not consider psychological studies like these to be science?
    Of course not.

    First off, this is a study, it is not a scientific experiment. And it says it is merely a study, it does not claim the status of a scientific experiment.

    But worse, this study does not test the Theory of Psychology because Psychology has no Theory to test.

    By contrast, if it were the science of Astronomy we would have a scientific experiment to test the Theory of Relativity.

Similar Threads

  1. [E9] Any 9 experts around here?
    By Silveresque in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 134
    Last Post: 07-09-2012, 08:52 PM
  2. [so] Any so/sx people around here?
    By fidelia in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-29-2010, 11:54 AM
  3. [INTP] Any INTP's around here make a marriage work with a ESFJ
    By Chris1973 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 10-17-2009, 08:43 PM
  4. Any Hegel fans here?
    By antireconciler in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-23-2009, 08:08 AM
  5. Any Flash Animators here?
    By darlets in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-20-2007, 10:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO