Philosophy or Psychology?

[Lark]

Which has proven the most helpful or comforting to you? I think there's consolation in each.

 

[nozflubber]

Philosophy by far: Kant and Smith can make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. however, no class has scared the shit out of me more than Social Psychology and learning about the milgram experiments, social exchange theory, conformity experiments, etc.

 

[Sniffles]

Philosophy definately.

 

[ajblaise]

Under the broadest definitions of philosophy; psychology is philosophy. And all social and natural science is philosophy.

Under another definition, science essentially came from philosophy, and is almost like a more lasered-in and precise version of philosophy. Like before we had modern physical science, we had natural philosophy.

So really, ya gotta give it up for philosophy at large.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Which has proven the most helpful or comforting to you? I think there's consolation in each.

Your question is far too broad. If you are looking for comfort by answering questions about the world that aren't easily researched on the empirical level such those regarding morality, consciousness and free will, then philosophy is a better fit. If you're looking to develop abstract reasoning skills in general so you could be prepared to solve all kinds of difficult problems in life then philosophy is also a better fit. Yet if you are looking to answer concrete, specific and empirically researchable questions about human behavior such as for example how people behave when they feel they are going to die next year, how an anxiety disorder impacts the life of an average person and so forth, then psychology will be of greater service to you than philosophy.

 

[run]

Helpful or comorting to me? I dunno... Both in ways. I'd say that philosophy is more important, because without there is no science of math or anything. But that's not what you were asking

 

[Matthew_Z]

Philosophy, including the of psychology.

 

[Qre:us]

I am more partial to the scientific method, under which Psychology can conform, as a practical application. As well, Psychology aims to understand the cognitive mind, our behaviours, interactions, intent, while Philosophy answers questions rising out of our metacognition. I'm fascinated with any undertaking that studies the mind, itself. So, psychology wins.

(and I agree with those that say that we cannot always cleanly separate the two disciplines, and that the development of the scientific method can be attributed to philosophy)

 

[Take Five]

psychology has never been comforting to me so i'll go with philosophy

 

[Not_Me]

Neither. Nothing beats comfort food!

 

[Lark]

Your question is far too broad.

If it helps I was thinking in the context of the Consolations of Philosophy.

Also there's a branch of therapy in the US, heavily influenced by Ayn Rand, which refer to themselves as Philosophical Practitioners, they eschew psychology and psychiatry (with the possible exception of some of Freud) in favour of Aristotle etc.

I was going for that essential contrast or dichotomy. Of late I've derived more consolation from psychology, it makes life more explicable to me, my self, others, meaning. Although I would say that there is a blurring of the boundaries and can concur with the people in this thread who said they are closely related fields.

 

[Oaky]

Which has proven the most helpful or comforting to you? I think there's consolation in each.

Philosophy is my fun and mind's stimulant and food. It provides pathways for me to move throughout my life. Psychology is what I experiment with. It let's me understand people and their motives. Reading them like a book.

There is, of course, more to it. The question must be extended to reach a more precise conclusion.

 

[Kaveri]

Definitely philosophy! Psychology depresses me. Well, not all psychology. There is well-written psychology that recognises things such as spirituality... I like humanist psychology. But some psychology feels very cold and depressing. I started studying it as a minor at my university but felt so anguished by its contents that I decided to minor in something else. I don't want to read about "normal, succesful" development and "abnormal, unsuccesful" development and feel like a loser whose life is never going to be good. Besides, psychology puts people in boxes all the time, and I just don't want to do that, not all the time anyway. I don't want to build a worldview based on putting people into boxes, always knowing the average behaviour, the normal behaviour... no, not for me.

At least three of my peers reported similar feelings after studying one course of psychology at university.

Philosophy, on the other hand, is my comforter and friend. It helps to focus on that which is important.

Ironically, I received an award in psychology in high school.

 

[Hopelandic]

When I went through an existential crisis and extreme cognitive dissonance, I could not stomach philosophy. I still can't look at it in the same way. There's an inner nihilist I thought I could constrain (when I eventually stopped kidding myself and realised it was there) that comes out, when I contemplate anything remotely philosophical. When I felt very depressed, I simply did not want to think about philosophy; it meant nothing to me, because philosophy was nothing and so was I. Make sense?

I turned to auto self psychology to get out of a very dark period... Learning about my own nature, which I had dissarmed and tried to distroy, learning self observation/analysis and objective introspection.
"knowing thyself" has been the best path I have ever found myself on. It feels promising... it feels 'right'. I found this through psychology. Not via philosophy. It released me from black/white thinking, taught me self honesty, showed me the dillusions I blind myself with...

It's an ongoing process obviously.

Sigh, as usual, I digress..

I used psychology in my own way. Not in the clinical sense seen above.

Perhaps one day, I will be able to turn back to philosophy; I slowly am now. I think stabilizing my thoughts and emotions is imperative to really grasp philosophy anyway.

 

[Colors]

Psychology.

 

[Unkindloving]

Psychology, but based on slight knowledge of both.

 

[Litvyak]

I agree that it's hard to compare the two. Based on comfort, I'd go with psychology.

I wouldn't call anything "comforting" that philosophy gave me. At all. On the other hand, describing certain deviancies with the help of psychology makes life a lot easier for me.

 

[Llewellyn]

I thought about this lately, and (especially lately) psychology comes out as the far favourite (philosophy interest waning much (though still running in the background), psychology (being a more recent interest) continuing on, mainly in the (crossover?) form of Jung)

 

[LIND]

At the offset we have 2 problems with Psychology:
1. Although the symptoms of mental disorder overlap (even conflate) Psychology seeks to demarcate bounds in order to distinguish among them. The absurdity of all this is that in seekeing precision other symptoms will be added (which are normal) and thus each individual regardless of whether the individual has a mental problem or not will be fitted into a certain compartment. (Perhaps Psychology needs to define what is 'normal' anymore)..
2. Statistically, Psychology seeks to mimic science (the ultimate goal is to become one-a hopeless task) by seekeing causes and effects. For instance a research study hypothesizes: "An individual who harbors a spontaneous thought (e.g. to fantasize about women) increases the probability that that thought will be enacted. What Psychology seems to have a difficulty with is to provide a counterhypothesis to that which invokes question of the type 'what happens if the individual supresses that thought?' There certainly has to be negative consequences to supressing such thoughts. How do we respond to such difficulties? By employing Philosophy.

 

[Tiltyred]

Philosophy, particularly Boëthius.