3 ms·

I'm convinced it's associated with the methodology of how psychology has approached matters. In the world of biology, you're observing the world around you. Sa

I'm convinced it's associated with the methodology of how psychology has approached matters. In the world of biology, you're observing the world around you. Same for physics, chemistry, et al. This means that you can set up proper controls to obscure your own presence from any potential results (e.g., isolate everything in another room, use cameras to avoid being near animals, etc.) Psychology has the same nightmare as quantum physics: pre-existing thoughts and beliefs literally define what results you end up with. I'm convinced that psych is a victim of the "new" way of doing science: treating the Scientific Method™ as a self-evident concept instead of regarding science as a vastly certain domain of metaphysics.

BlueTemplar 4y ago
Well, all sciences have this issue : see Kuhn, Feyerabend... https://samzdat.com/2018/05/19/science-under-high-modernism/ https://samzdat.com/2018/05/19/science-under-high-modernism/ It would be kind of ironic if psychologists were more susceptible to the "Pop-Baconian" simplification of science ? And damning if what I've heard about psychology going through multiple paradigms during the 20th century alone is true. But then, indeed, also understandable, due to the "softness" and "paradigmlessness" of the subject matter, as Kuhn had pointedout the later back then ? It's still sad how we now have detailed theories and histories of science, but in practice scientists show no interest in trying to learn from them, nor the mistakes of their predecessors? But then maybe that would have too high of a cost. (Consider all those successful projects where the founders later say : "we didn't knew what we were getting into / that this was considered impossible".) Bonus : Wiseman & Schlitz’s attempts to do an adversarial super-controlled parapsychological experiment : ( IV. ) https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/28/the-control-group-is-out-of-control/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/28/the-control-group-is-o...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

BlueTemplar 4y ago

Well, all sciences have this issue : see Kuhn, Feyerabend... https://samzdat.com/2018/05/19/science-under-high-modernism/ https://samzdat.com/2018/05/19/science-under-high-modernism/ It would be kind of ironic if psychologists were more susceptible to the "Pop-Baconian" simplification of science ? And damning if what I've heard about psychology going through multiple paradigms during the 20th century alone is true. But then, indeed, also understandable, due to the "softness" and "paradigmlessness" of the subject matter, as Kuhn had pointedout the later back then ? It's still sad how we now have detailed theories and histories of science, but in practice scientists show no interest in trying to learn from them, nor the mistakes of their predecessors? But then maybe that would have too high of a cost. (Consider all those successful projects where the founders later say : "we didn't knew what we were getting into / that this was considered impossible".) Bonus : Wiseman & Schlitz’s attempts to do an adversarial super-controlled parapsychological experiment : ( IV. ) https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/28/the-control-group-is-out-of-control/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/28/the-control-group-is-o...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]