Is psychoanalysis full of bullshit? I think it is(even though

>everything is dicks, everything
>except the big black stick it keep sucking on, that's completely different

all social science is unfalsifiable bullshit.

>>2460696

>my parents are psychologists of this school

People still do that in 2017? I thought it was basically like being an alchemist today i.e. something you learn about for historical purposes maybe in a psychology course but not anything modern people practice.

>>2460832
a decade ago when I was a nineteen year old retard and ended up being thrown in a mental ward over a suicide attempt, I had a thirty-something year old psychologist assigned to me who I figured out pretty quick had a worse grasp of reality than I did(someone who just ate a bunch of pills in an attempt to die lmao). I talked her in circles, tricking her into contradicting herself, until she literally began insulting me, spouting fallacy, and even implied a threat to keep me detained. yes, pseudoscience is still prevalent in society.

The purpose was not be a science, it was to subvert goyim societies and normalize deviant non reproductive sexual behavior.

>>2460832
In my country everyone still practices psychoanalysis . We are also the country with most psychologists per capita in the world. That didn't help though

My gf studies psychology. How do I tell her it's pseudoscience without offending her?

>>2460889
you can't. women are incapable of reason if it contradicts their emotions.

>>2460889
I don't think behavioral psychology is pseudoscience though

>>2460900
not him but you cannot employ the scientific method to behavioral sciences. it's why biology is considered "softer" than chemistry or other hard science fields.

>>2460909
You are saying Darwin was full of shit? Absolutely disgusting

>>2460959
yes, he died not understanding sexual selection. though he laid the groundwork for understanding natural selection which became a science once genetics were investigated, during his time his work was nothing but an incomplete hypothesis.

your comparison is akin to implying that astrologists were full of shit because they figured out there was a difference between planets and stars.

>Hey, /his/, help me disprove the validity of my parents' profession.

It really sends electrical impulses throughout the grey matter.

>>2460909
I see you've been visiting /sci/
Protip: it's just a meme

>>2460696
>>2460832
>>2460864
Psychoanalysis isn't psychology you faggots

>>2460696
Psychology is a fraud that is the requisite of the secular world.

I hate it. inb4 t. scientologist.

>>2460816
The whole point of social science is for it to be falsifiable. Look up "Falsification".

I don't know, but Freud was right on about girls having penis envy because I certainly do!!!

>>2460696
Jung is is fairly balnced, but Freud caan fuck off with rules that apply to everyone but him.

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar," MY ASS, SIGGY.

>>2462685
You can have mine.

>>2460816
>>2460909
Psychology and the social sciences aren't pseudoscience. The whole idea of falsifiability as a means of demarcation comes from Popper, who is pretty universally rejected in his solution.

Consider, for example, Newtonian physics. This is almost universally considered an example of science, but it's horribly unfalsifiable. Whenever the model yielded incorrect predictions, astronomers just went "lol there must be another planet we can't see" until the early 1900's when Einstein expanded on the Newtonian conception of the universe and explained why there wasn't actually a planet between Mercury and the Sun. Even if you continue to insist on falsibiability because of its convenience, almost all social sciences are subject to very strict criterion in terms of what is allowed to be considered a theory. Psychology, especially, has incredibly rigorous methods when it comes to determining reliable theories, because psychologists understand that a lot of economics and sociology relies on their work. That said, I think it is fair to say that most of psychoanalysis, at least Freud's conception of it, is bullshit, precisely because it doesn't even make realistic predictions. It's falsifiable, and false.

>muh psy ants
Back to ribbit, frogposter

>>2460696
>hur hur Freud is bullshit
>doesn't realize that Freud and psychoanalysis have been disavowed for decades

>>2460959
He is you cuck.

>>2462951

Quality post

>>2460864
That is based af.

>>2460864
Maybe she was right and you were using fallacies.

>>2460909
>biology is softer than chemistry
Its like saying physics is softer than mathematics. The two go hand in hand. Physics offers the overarching theories and utilizes math to explain it. The same is true of biology and chemistry, organic chemistry specifically.

File: Lewis.jpg (593KB, 1920x1354px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 1920x1354px

Yes.

Freud, Marx, Nietzsche and Darwin are the 4 horsemen of atheism.

They're all wrong but they greatly aided the philosophical naturalists and atheists in the destruction of western civilization.

>>2463567
>nee chee
>atheism

File: passiveagg.jpg (188KB, 1139x932px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1139x932px

>>2463567
>They're all wrong