Someone here can prove that psychology is a science with some

For starters, how could it be a science if it studies "the mind" which is an immaterial concept?

>>8814357
It is a science. That's not the issue. It's a shit science that hasn't properly defined it's object of study and is mostly philosophers playing scientist by bending frameworks of ambiguous and interchangeable terminology around the unquantifiable to capture the wishful thinking of someone's pretense.

>>8814357
Academic handwaving framed with the engine of confirmation bias that is the statistical method.

File: 1486164785884.jpg (39KB, 711x620px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 711x620px

>>8814396
>>8814507
>>8814510
I asked if someone have sources not opinions. I am starting to get the impression that sci lacks reading comprehension skills. You are not a community of scientists to give such implications and your I dont want to say you are retarded but by your answers I already know you never read anything about their methodologies. Your arguments could be implied to any scientific field there is. Everything has a philosophical background.

Is noone on this board who got sources? I do not care about anons interpretation of what is science and what is pseudoscience I got philosophy of science for that.

>>8814565
Only a social scientist would overlook the content of an argument in search of credentials and sources. This is just the state of things, dipshit. It doesn't need a source. The flaw in social science is methodological.

>>8814565
NO U.
How the hell are we supposed to know, what do you mean by "souces to prove that psychology is a science"? You need papers? We got a fuckton of them. Experiments? Yes. Reviews? Yes. Meta-reviews? Yes. Books? Yes. Textbooks? Yes. You can google everything, what do you want?

>>8814357
Psychology is not a science. End of argument. They cant prove anything. Their statistics are too open to interpretation. They cant replicate a lot of experiments. Its just a philosophy about human mind and behavior. I would rate it one step above gender studies. That is probably why most women choose it as their major.

>>8814578
This
>http://www.fromthelabbench.com/from-the-lab-bench-science-blog/is-psychology-really-science-why-yes-it-is
>>8814357
>>8814396
>>8814607
Psychology is a science and the onus isn't on anyone here nor psychologists/psychology itself to prove it. The onus is all of you who disagree to prove why it isn't, which you can't and which every argument that's tried has failed to do.
>>8814507
Memeing at best and nowhere near a proper argument

>>8814701
>woman
>science
>psychology
There is no correlation.

>>8814701
>First and foremost, there are no “facts” in science.
>That is why it’s the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution.
Bahahahahahahahaha

>>8814701
Are you a brainlet by any chance?

I'll repeat what certain other anons have said. Psychology is a science, but its a science in its infancy. its going through a lot of the growing pains other sciences have dealt with, with defining its terms and finding the methodologies that produce good, reliable, objective results, and still suffers from the snake-oil salesmen that infect it.

But, its at a crossing where it can go one of two ways. It can move towards neuroscience, and psychology can become to neuroscience what chemistry is to physics, or it can move towards the literary, social sciences, and be forever ruined.

There's a lot of good psychology and a lot of bad psychology. Most of the good psychology can tell you what's going on based on various structures in the brain and the responses they produce, such as demonstrating very specific deficiencies produced in response to damage to certain areas of the brain.

>>8814716
There is nothing worth keeping. All what you described that is good science like neuroscience should be psychiatry and biology related field. If the other social aspect of it is useless it should be abolished because we got the social aspect in sociology already. Why having a psychology if only neuroscience is acceptable in it?

>>8814706
Not what I said and you're missing the point. No one ITT needs to start with OP's supposition that psychology isn't a science, and along with that fact OP and the other anons I linked haven't given valid reasins anyway why anyone should in the first place. Even the phsychology is a shit science argument is meme teir. Psych's relatively new but proven itself as a science and quite a valuable one at that.
>>8814710
No but you sure are

>>8814768
I bet you are a brainlet that is too smart for math.

http://skepticaleducator.org/why-psychology-is-not-a-science/

>>8814768
>Not what I said
Retard, it's what your source said

>>8814357
>psychology is a science with some sources?
Whenever te words "psychology" appears in the same sentence as "science" you should always think of
> Cargo Cult Science
> by RICHARD P. FEYNMAN

>Some remarks on science, pseudoscience, and learning how to not fool yourself. Caltech’s 1974 commencement address.

http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm

File: 2bbca7e9ed7617430481510e73c69ac4973baf19cd988853bc74ed79e7ab1cc4.jpg (101KB, 600x480px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 600x480px

>>8814357
>>8814396
>>8814507
>>8814510
>>8814565
>>8814575
>>8814578
>>8814607
>>8814701
>>8814705
>>8814706
>>8814710
>>8814716
>>8814726
>>8814768
>>8814794
>>8814800
>>8814811
>>8814902
Brainlet niggertierplebs cant comprehend tfw too smart to reply unironically.

>>8814794
And I bet you didn't read my post
>>8814811
Did you even read rest of that as well?And even so the author is still more right than you. And I'll ask you again too, explain why anyone ITT should automatically take OP 's supposition that psychology is not a science as fact and then do the research he should have done on his own and prove it