3 ms·

I'm of the opinion that the complexity of possible human behavior and phenomena is too great to allow for some experiments to be replicated and controlled. The

by ble 8y ago

I'm of the opinion that the complexity of possible human behavior and phenomena is too great to allow for some experiments to be replicated and controlled. There are some scientific facts about humans that you can establish because you can do a replicated, controlled experiment and there are others that you can't, for ethical (no one should allow this experiment to be done) or material reasons (this experiment is very easy to conduct assuming you have multiple copies of the planet earth).

nonbel 8y ago
How many different ways are there to form a solar system? I am sure the requirements for experiment and possible combinations of factors are just as daunting. So, I don't think thats the real problem. I think the main real problem is that in the failing fields they look for differences between groups while in the successful fields they look for "universal" rules.
rocqua 8y ago
> I'm of the opinion that the complexity of possible human behavior and phenomena is too great to allow for some experiments to be replicated and controlled. If these elements of human behavior cannot be confirmed by replicable experiments, what chance do we have of knowing about it. Claims about such behavior are nothing more than stories, for they are not based on evidence. > There are some scientific facts about humans that you can establish because you can do a replicated, controlled experiment and there are others that you can't There is no such thing as a 'scientific fact' that cannot be established by a replicated controlled experiment. The stated dichotomy is really important though, and one that it seems psychology has partially failed to make. For it lost its reputation by presenting 'stories' as scientific fact. That is not to say there is no value in studying human behavior that is beyond science, but we need to realize that we cannot treat the result of this as 'scientifically true'. Instead, it is something like 'intuitively true based on anecdotal experience'.

by ble 8y ago

nonbel 8y ago

How many different ways are there to form a solar system? I am sure the requirements for experiment and possible combinations of factors are just as daunting. So, I don't think thats the real problem. I think the main real problem is that in the failing fields they look for differences between groups while in the successful fields they look for "universal" rules.

rocqua 8y ago

> I'm of the opinion that the complexity of possible human behavior and phenomena is too great to allow for some experiments to be replicated and controlled. If these elements of human behavior cannot be confirmed by replicable experiments, what chance do we have of knowing about it. Claims about such behavior are nothing more than stories, for they are not based on evidence. > There are some scientific facts about humans that you can establish because you can do a replicated, controlled experiment and there are others that you can't There is no such thing as a 'scientific fact' that cannot be established by a replicated controlled experiment. The stated dichotomy is really important though, and one that it seems psychology has partially failed to make. For it lost its reputation by presenting 'stories' as scientific fact. That is not to say there is no value in studying human behavior that is beyond science, but we need to realize that we cannot treat the result of this as 'scientifically true'. Instead, it is something like 'intuitively true based on anecdotal experience'.