3 ms·

You are only looking at other fields successes and only Psychology's failures. Quick to forget all the false starts and wrong directions in other fields.

wholinator2 3y ago
I suggest, instead of bringing up how other science has failed too, you bring up the successes of psychology. Nobody here will be convinced by scientific whataboutism, however, if you were to compose a comment on the important successes of psychology with cited sources i think that would work much better
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  The antagonism is to great. You want me to cite sources to justify an entire field? Just go look. Why would I spend a lot of time on sources that nobody will read. It isn't my job to educate the world. Do your own research.
- lanstin 3y ago
  Big five personality types, fight or flight brain circuits, pause and plan brain circuits, fundamentals drive of brain to predict what happens next (externally and internally), lack of universal emotional responses. The existence of things going on in the brain that the mind has very limited awareness of (the “unconscious”).
bell-cot 3y ago
One hallmark of actual sciences is that they notice their false starts and wrong directions, learn from them, improve fairly rapidly, and can ~reliably deliver complex things that actually work. By that metric, Psychology seems profoundly lacking.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  Do I really need to go through and trace the entire history of psychology and every false start and course correction in order to prove that they do it too? Do you see the difference in the burden of proof. You are starting from the position of 'Psychology' is all false, now proof everything by citing everything over again. But, to do so, I would need to cite something in Psychology, and you can just deny it again. What evidence can be cited if all evidence is dismissed. You will probably say something along the lines of 'what can be verified or repeated'. Ok, just go look. Why do I need to re-cite an entire discipline, just go read it.

wholinator2 3y ago

I suggest, instead of bringing up how other science has failed too, you bring up the successes of psychology. Nobody here will be convinced by scientific whataboutism, however, if you were to compose a comment on the important successes of psychology with cited sources i think that would work much better

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
The antagonism is to great. You want me to cite sources to justify an entire field? Just go look. Why would I spend a lot of time on sources that nobody will read. It isn't my job to educate the world. Do your own research.
lanstin 3y ago
Big five personality types, fight or flight brain circuits, pause and plan brain circuits, fundamentals drive of brain to predict what happens next (externally and internally), lack of universal emotional responses. The existence of things going on in the brain that the mind has very limited awareness of (the “unconscious”).

bell-cot 3y ago

One hallmark of actual sciences is that they notice their false starts and wrong directions, learn from them, improve fairly rapidly, and can ~reliably deliver complex things that actually work. By that metric, Psychology seems profoundly lacking.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
Do I really need to go through and trace the entire history of psychology and every false start and course correction in order to prove that they do it too? Do you see the difference in the burden of proof. You are starting from the position of 'Psychology' is all false, now proof everything by citing everything over again. But, to do so, I would need to cite something in Psychology, and you can just deny it again. What evidence can be cited if all evidence is dismissed. You will probably say something along the lines of 'what can be verified or repeated'. Ok, just go look. Why do I need to re-cite an entire discipline, just go read it.