3 ms·

That's not a fair statement. Psychology is an extremely complex science, similar to weather forecasting. We still don't get forecasting right beyond a couple o

That's not a fair statement. Psychology is an extremely complex science, similar to weather forecasting. We still don't get forecasting right beyond a couple of days at best. There are so many factors and moving parts in the brain, that its impossible right now to take them all into account. Especially since every psychologist would agree, we still don't know all of the moving parts yet. It's also a very young field in comparison. It's only been a serious scientific endeavor since the Freud and Jung time. Roughly only 100 years.

mythrwy 7y ago
Jung and Freud are like reading Timothy Leary or the Prophet Ezekiel. It's not science in the same way testing for dark matter is. Science must be quantifiable, repeatable, testable, and have controlled experimental conditions, an agreed upon terminology, etc. etc. Simply asking people how they feel then sprinkling some statistics over the responses to try to grasp meaning isn't really the scientific method. That's not to say belief systems aren't important, they are. Nor to say psychology might not provide help to people or insights, I'm sure it can in the hands of a trained practitioner. But as for it being a "science", Lutus' claim is very fair, and I think he is right.
- corodra 7y ago
  Yea, they laid the groundwork for questions to ask and recorded the lives and data from people, trying to find some correlation. I'm not saying they were perfect. They were the first ones that tried to do it seriously. Freud came up with his parent relations theory of people being jacked in the head because he saw a lot of that going on. But Jung, taking that info found that it's even deeper than that. You also have to realize that not everything is perfectly quantifiable if you don't know how to quantify yet. Under your assumption, we should just give up entirely on trying to understand how and why people think the way they do. The right questions still aren't figured out yet. Hell, don't forget there were problems with predicting orbits with newtonian physics. It wasn't until einstein's theory of relativity that fully figured out orbits of local solar system objects. Does that mean that newton should have been thrown out immediately and the field of astro physics should have been trashed? You're living in an imaginary reality that all answers are perfectly figured out in the first try. That's not science. Again, psychology is young and there are a ton of unanswered questions. It's not like "people thinking" is fake. We do it. How and why? It's trying to better understand how the most complex structure that we know of works, the brain. Neuroscience explains the gears and pulleys. But it can't recreate a functioning brain. Both neuroscience and psychology would need to be mastered to do so.
- danso 7y ago
  Just because psychology studies things that are hard to quantify – often resulting in practitioners who do not follow good scientific method – does not mean it's not a science.

mythrwy 7y ago

Jung and Freud are like reading Timothy Leary or the Prophet Ezekiel. It's not science in the same way testing for dark matter is. Science must be quantifiable, repeatable, testable, and have controlled experimental conditions, an agreed upon terminology, etc. etc. Simply asking people how they feel then sprinkling some statistics over the responses to try to grasp meaning isn't really the scientific method. That's not to say belief systems aren't important, they are. Nor to say psychology might not provide help to people or insights, I'm sure it can in the hands of a trained practitioner. But as for it being a "science", Lutus' claim is very fair, and I think he is right.

corodra 7y ago
Yea, they laid the groundwork for questions to ask and recorded the lives and data from people, trying to find some correlation. I'm not saying they were perfect. They were the first ones that tried to do it seriously. Freud came up with his parent relations theory of people being jacked in the head because he saw a lot of that going on. But Jung, taking that info found that it's even deeper than that. You also have to realize that not everything is perfectly quantifiable if you don't know how to quantify yet. Under your assumption, we should just give up entirely on trying to understand how and why people think the way they do. The right questions still aren't figured out yet. Hell, don't forget there were problems with predicting orbits with newtonian physics. It wasn't until einstein's theory of relativity that fully figured out orbits of local solar system objects. Does that mean that newton should have been thrown out immediately and the field of astro physics should have been trashed? You're living in an imaginary reality that all answers are perfectly figured out in the first try. That's not science. Again, psychology is young and there are a ton of unanswered questions. It's not like "people thinking" is fake. We do it. How and why? It's trying to better understand how the most complex structure that we know of works, the brain. Neuroscience explains the gears and pulleys. But it can't recreate a functioning brain. Both neuroscience and psychology would need to be mastered to do so.
danso 7y ago
Just because psychology studies things that are hard to quantify – often resulting in practitioners who do not follow good scientific method – does not mean it's not a science.