She honestly believes psychology is a science

no it is not. I wonder why you insist on the issue.

That's not a requirement of science, anonymous...

People are still on about that shitty study that looked at shaky psychology disciplines like personality and sexual instead of the ones that are actually useful and we'll grounded like behavioral and social? Hell even ignoring that, the study was full of shit itself.

news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2016/03/study-that-undercut-psych-research-got-it-wrong/

Psychology is more of a service at least in my opinion it is.

At least it tries.

So charitable of you, but How is understanding perception, behavior, and cognition useless?

>How is understanding perception, behavior, and cognition useless?
That's neurology, not psychology.

Nope. Neurologists are MDs. Usually they are not researchers as well as clinicians. Maybe you were trying to say that only brain science with imaging is real science? I'm afraid you're out of your element.

You're an idiot.

Psychology gets a bad rap for a lot of different well-deserve reasons, but that shouldn't take away from the more scientific areas of study. Anyone that doesn't see the benefits that have been reaped from the field and the areas of scientific validity is just too lazy to truly consider the matter. The main issue with psychology is the hastiness to have it support biases and propaganda, as well as the way journalism handles it (generally blowing one study way out of proportion to "prove" something way out of its capacity). Then with the actual practice of psychology there's the issue of finding a standard and people mostly being out for insurance money. I know this thread was either started to troll or for a circle jerk session but these type of attitudes toward things just aggravates me. Psychology sucks, but not for the reasons you think.

this is a good article, and to add on to it, I never understood why u guys think psych isn't a science. disclaimer: I'm a psych major, but psych research creates predictive models and does statistical hypothesis testing. granted, there's some pretty sketch scientifically weak parts of psychology in its history, but as a whole we conduct science research like any other discipline. you can argue whether it's a good or a shitty science, but it's definitely science.

Disclaimer: I'm a psych major, but we conduct experiments using statistical methods to examine the results and check hypotheses like any other science. you can argue whether psych is a good science or a shit one, but it's science.

oops I double posted lol I bought the first comment didn't upload

That means aroma therapy is a science to!

You just legitimized Psychology into a holistic practice.

Besides, it's a sociopolitical holistic science, not a real science. Politicians and laws regulate what it can do or say.

he meant in a way that none of the results are reproduceable.

I've just read this article.
Sound more like psychology professors grasping for straws.
Their arguments are stuff like, they didn't use the same population, they didn't use exactly the same procedure we used, etc.
The truth is, there is some real science and there is some complete bullshit psychology papers published. Until psychology gets rid of the bullshit, I can't take it seriously.
So in fact trying to discredit it as a science, is a benefit for everyone.
Do you want to doubt every second sentence in your psychology book?
If not, then you should get rid of the bad studies and reexamine everything, you read.

sorry my man, but you are wrong. Every psychology class I ever took does not conduct itself as a science course. It is always changing, Freud was terribly wrong with his contention of the ego, most importantly it is biased

i literally just finished a statistics course along with a research methods course for psychology. We were encouraged to be extremely skeptical
in designing studies and interpreting results, and we were literally taught to use statistical hypothesis testing, the importance of rigorously controlled trials, etc. I completely agree that there are some historically sketch areas of psychology, Freud included. But there is also more scientifically rigorous research done, and therefore I'm saying that psychology is a science, even if it's a bad one.

define science

Psychology is about as accurate as racism.

It's not just psychology grasping at straws.

It's politicians who write laws based on their feelings and public and media attention that need psychology to support their ambiguous protections, and the legal system that has to enforce those laws.

Not him but It's just weird. You don't say I'm going to go defacate. You don't say I'm going to urinate. You don't say I'm going to go consume some biological tissue. Calling women and girls "females" is district rhetorical decision. One which isn't going to help you empathize with them and understand their the way they think and feel. IMO one should try to empathize with racists, race supremacists, conspiracy theorists, rapists, murderers, feminists, sjws, everything.

>wins arguments psychology is a physical science
>postulates through neuropsychologic science
>goes back to lab and debates whether research is science

CBT has scientific basis. One of the few legit fields.

>they didn't use the same population, they didn't use exactly the same procedure we used

How is that grasping for straws? In one example it talked about how in a study they found an effect when they used exact same population but not when they used a completely different population who spoke a different language IV and had no ties to what the study was trying to find. Then in the paper they discarded the study that showed an effect and kept the other for no reason. They had no rample sampling, they didn't test the most reliable classes and the stastics when corrected showed the same results as all the studies being correct but getting no results due to chance.

we get it, you're a virgin and your best friend likes you but only as a friend

go back to your math scribbles and cry like the little bitch you are and always will be

>I will take the bait. Homeopathy employs the scientific method and is therefore science. It might be a useless non-predictive science but it is science nevertheless.

>wins arguments with self psychology is a physical science
>postulates cognitivneuropsychopathology job may not be sciency enough though
>goes back to lab and debates whether his job should be more sciency
>goes all out making sure it's not
>writes down some scribbles
>gets hyped on being totally over it

Homeopathy doesn't use the scientific method in any way because that consistently shows that homeopathy is a fraud.

Well, you can't claim psychology is a science when it makes assumptions based on studies of ambiguous ideas to support political and legal agendas.

OP here
Had a date with an undergrad psych major
turned into a bitch session because of some roommate(bio maj.) she was having problems with.
mfw "Biology isn't even really science, its more like.. history". I shit you not..

to add to this, i did ask her what made her think psych was more of a science, the most i could get out of her was "It's psychology, it just is"

Yes it is, phych major.

Mmmm k

feelings got hurt I guess

>Scientists can reproduce results in particle physics at various accelerators across the world
>mfw QFT, QCD, and QED all model interactions at a precision and accuracy that is beautiful to behold
>mfw even undergrads can take the data from several detectors and reproduce published results

What's psychology's excuse again?

Read the thread. Psychology doesn't have a replicability problem, that meme study was full of holes and if I could find the meta analysis I've posted many of times I could show you how psychology has much higher rates of replicability than genetics, neuroscience and many medically related studies like cancer research.

Not to mention psychology studies complex behaviors with many factors while particle physics studies very simple and pure elements of nature.

>>sorry my man, but you are wrong. Every psychology class I ever took does not conduct itself as a science course. It is always changing, Freud was terribly wrong with his contention of the ego, most importantly it is biased

>Every psychology class I ever took
>Freud

something's not right here.

You want to women to stop stop beleving in Psychology?

Simple as fuck.

Show her this article (which is true in my opinion)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis_envy

*you want A

Phew glad someone is here to tell me what my posts "actually" mean and shovel some SJW agenda down my throat. Back to where you came from heathen >>>/reddit/

>Medicine
>Science

pick one. "he who heals is in the right" has never been, is not and will never be a scientific principle.

this is not to say that medicine (and hence psychology) are worthless, on the contrary. carpentry is also not science, yet very useful.

>Jesus carpenter.
>Carpentry useful.
>Jesus useful
God confirmed, Abrahamic religions confirmed.

okay then.

>okay then
Further confirmation!

top fucking kek
this so much

>psychology don't real
>is successfully applied every day in risk assessment, marketing, education and advertising

Every topic has real world application
Doesn't make history or literature science

There's an interesting aspect to this. It's like expert game theorists being good at some types of predictions.

A lot of the time it's simply because they are very smart to begin with and not much to do with the application of game theory to the problem.

It's obvious that a big company would hire a psychologist, but the actual effectiveness might simply be hiring a smart person and have nothing to do with psychology itself.

Just google, experts predictions fail.