How do we fix psychology so it actually has the standards of

why even bother. Neuroscience is more rigorous

>>8998760
Because Psychology has the sway of other sciences but without the standards to actually see if it's right or not. Imagine if say chemistry or biology were like that, imagine destructive that would be. On the other hand right now we have entire subfields of psychology that are literal bullshit. It warps the way we look at humanity.

>>8998760
If Neuroscience starts getting results and factual explanations about the brain and human behavior do you think Psychology should be taken out of the picture or just to be reestructurated?

>>8998760
You cant explain human behavior by looking at the brain. Hell, you cant even explain how a simple neural network works by looking at the neurons and weights, you can only see it work.

>>8998769
why not? serious question

Behavioral Biology > Psychology
Of course it makes most people uncomfortable because it actually talks about the biology behind the way we think rather than making some bullshit other realm of explanations and analogy to make the human mind seem like a magical realm.

>>8998743
The worst part about psychology is the IRB. You can have an entire field of study blackballed by academia because muh racism. A few shitty people take advantage of blacks in the 50s or so, and ruin things for everyone half a century later

>>8998772
Because it's complicated and they haven't figured it out yet.

>>8998743
>Lack of repeatability in experiments

That's because your most interesting results are usually case studies that can't be repeated for ethical reasons.

>>8998778
It doesn't matter how convenient the excuses are, unrepeatable experiments are still shit

>>8998778
I consider myself an ethical person but it's bullshit that it is only relatively recently that we know that different parts of the brain perform different functions and that we needed case studies to show this. How has no scientist conducted tests that involve damaging parts of animal brains to see if it effects specific mental functions.

>>8998772
Because in such "non-linear" systems the whole is more than the sum of parts, the interaction between neurons cannot be explained by reduction. And trying to understand the interaction of billons of neurons in the human brain is beyond our technology right now

>>8998783
People have known or at least suspected that different parts of the brain control different actions. We just didn't have solid proof.

The pseudoscience of phrenology was based on the understanding that different parts of the brain control different things

File: cancer.png (122KB, 251x284px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 251x284px

>Modern Racism
>This is an actual psychological term
>Social psychologist introduced the idea of Modern Racism, which refers to subtle forms of prejudice hat coexist with rejection of racist beliefs
>Modern Racists tend to believe that discrimination is no longer a serious problem. They think that minority groups are demanding too many changes...
>For example. a version of this scale was used to assess subtle racism against Asians in Canada (son Hing, Chung-Yan, Hamilton, and Zanna 2008). Participants were asked to agree or disagree with statesments such as... "Discrimination against Asains is no longer a problem in Canada" and "It is too easy for Asains to illegally arrive in Canada and reeive refugee status"

This is a real psychological definition and you are determined to be apart of this definition of a "Modern Racist" if you don't believe racism against asians is a problem. This is some amazing circular fucking logic here and useless masturbation.

File: 1465535092732.jpg (73KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 400x600px

>>8998786
The issue is that it wouldn't have been hard to get that solid proof, the fact that they literally had to wait decades for someone to happen to get specific brain injuries rather than causing them themselves in animals shows how shit of a science it is and if you want to cry about Ethics than you need to keep in mind that psychologists had no ethical problem with lobotomies after it was shown that YES parts of the brain do have different functions.
These fuckers never cared about ethics, they were just shit scientists.

File: Cog Science Postcard .png (89KB, 1600x1028px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1600x1028px

>>8998743
Turn it into Cognitive Science / Neurology / Neuroscience.

More rigorous programs that excludes Marxist & Freudian Humanities Bullshit.

>>8998812
The issue isn't even that it has Marxists in it. If a science is good and empirical than political belief shouldn't even effect the results much at all. This is the case for Physics for example, so why can't Psychology be the same?

>>8998760
good one lol

>>8998743
Step 1: Revoke all PhD's women have in this field, delete all of their research and then ban new women from getting into psychology

That is step 1. Now, it is going to be complicated from here. But listen out for step 2, in step 2 you...

Wait.
Wait.

Oh, psychology is already fixed. Step 1 was the only step necessary. Who would have thought. Good evening sir, I guess we fixed psychology just by taking women out of it.

>>8999013
this

File: 9rlbefx44sty.jpg (160KB, 500x706px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 500x706px

>>8999013
Bullshits such as the concept of "millions" of genders & "genderfluid" were created by SJW Woman Psychologists in the last decade

go back to square 1, ringing bells and bringing doggos beefsteaks

Social psychology is the embarrassing subfield. Rest of psychology is ok.

>Journals only want to publish positive results but rarely want to post negative results which are just as important

That's every science

>>8998743
The field of psychology is still new. The biggest issue I have with the subfields is how abstract the concepts are, they are not difficult to understand but do not pass the falsifiability test and many researchers can interpret a result to support their hypothesis or find a way refute an undesirable result.

Learning and neuroscience are better at this than other subfields, although each subfield has a bunch of dogmatic theories/models which leads to very narrow minded interpretations and research focus. In time the field will improve.