Is "Psychology = pseudo-science" just a meme? I used

File: rpf.jpg (105KB, 413x705px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 413x705px

>>7938242
>Is "Psychology = pseudo-science" just a meme

No.

The first person to mention psychology and the person who created the word psychology was a Croatian writer Marko Marulić who lived on the 15th/16th century.

>>7938247

This is exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. This argument would work perfectly for Freud, who developed an entire theory with the id, ego and superego (and all the sexual stuff) with no scientific testing whatsoever - he based it solely on his experience with his patients.

But psychology doesn't do that anymore. The only field within psychology that even comes close is social psychology, and even that isn't as bad as what that picture depicts.

No other comments? I figured you people would be all over this.

>>7938242
>>7938404
>No other comments?

It's already been discussed to death.
http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248
This is all you need to answer your question.

/thread

>>7938438

Are you retarded? 39% of ~100 articles within *social* psychology - the psychological field with the least rigorous testing methods - does not equate to "over half of psychology studies failing reproducibility tests."

Admittedly, the article headline is to blame for the misunderstanding, but if you actually read the article you'd know it's total bs.

Nosek believes that other scientific fields are likely to have much in common with psychology. One analysis found that only 6 of 53 high-profile papers in cancer biology could be reproduced and a related reproducibility project in cancer biology is currently under way.

>>7938536

That last line was obviously a quote, but I derped while posting it. My point was that the failure of reproducibility within social psychology isn't particularly meaningful or telling of psychology's status - especially as a whole.

>>7938438
http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/psychology-replications/files/gilbert_king_pettigrew_wilson_2016_with_appendix.pdf?m=1456973260

kek

There is no such thing as a meme science.

>>7938264
The thing that killed me about psych odds how much time they spend teaching and discussing the history. If you study physics or geology you may here about the geocentric and heliocentric models briefly for 3 minutes of even that.

>>7939150

I'm currently studying psychology, and I can tell you that we've only had one subject that dealt with history, which was evenly split between history and methodology. If it gets a lot of attention in the curriculum, it must be an American thing. Which makes sense, given how much people over there still stroke Freud's cock.

>>7938242

Many experiments were falsified. Much of it relies on sketchy reasoning.

Some of it is legit. I think the worst that can happen is that you consider findings in the field to be consistent with scientific findings in others. Eg, you equate the theory of gravity with the theory that people should mate with people whose shirts smell good, or that some psychotropic drugs are better than other forms of coping with brain problems.

>>7938242
> fMRIs, EEGs
are people who criticism psychology's scientific credentials aware of the ironies that plague their fallacious reasoning?

As if science is made by machinery. The machine says electrical amplitude increases and bloodflow decreases, therefore this is more scientific than handing somebody a piece of paper with a 5 point scale, or asking them directly whether they like something or not

So no, asking whether psychology is a science or not is the wrong question, what you should be asking is what exactly is the mental dysfunction of people who argue about whether psychology is a science or not. If they are unable to discuss directly the findings and positions of psychology, on what grounds do they discuss it? On the grounds of an abstract psychology that exists nowhere and has no specific results or texts? That is pretty much the intellectual equivalent of putting up a strawman to say that it is bad

psychology is not the problem, the problem is you

Psychiatry>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Psychology.
One is based on science the other is based on a researcher's hunch. If you want to explore the mind in a scientific way, psychiatry is the way to go.

I had to take psychology and developmental psychology as pre-reqs in college and the one thing I found really interesting is the "Visual Cliff" experiment on babies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6cqNhHrMJA

Other than that, psychology is a meme. There was this homicidal case where this dude brutally killed his in-laws but had no recollection the next morning. He was set free because they proved that it was a sleepwalking act.

>>7939427
Sleepwalking? Wouldn't that be disassociative amnesia? What the fuck?

>>7939747
Yeah pham apparently there's many cases. Look up "Parks case sleepwalking murder"

I have schizophrenia please cure me.
No seriously please fucking cure me.

File: 1457048474018.png (236KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 500x281px

>>7939780

Aren't there at least treatments for schizophrenia? Take your medication.

>>7939784
They took me off the medicine.
I am become fucked up now.
Nothing real feels.
I thought psychology wassum to save me.
Now I can't trust it anymore.
Typing this really confuses me fucking.

>>7939422
Psychiatry utilizes a lot of theory from psychology.

Being a psychiatrist is cool and all, but you ain't gonna be doing any research.

>>7939427

How does that one anecdote make psychology a meme? ? ? ?? ? ?? ???????

>>7939422
Wat

>>7939150
Knowing the history of theoretical development is critical to understanding where the field has been and where it's going. Our understanding of the brain is rapidly developing. Everyone shits on freud but concepts like ego and id are still used and useful today.