3 ms·

What exactly do you think are the foundations of modern psychology? Serious question. There are tons of non-replicable findings way, way further down the stack

What exactly do you think are the foundations of modern psychology? Serious question. There are tons of non-replicable findings way, way further down the stack than psychology, and those tend to have a lot more relying on them than psychology/sociology studies. If you're upset about scientific validity, consider directing your ire to where problems are more likely to actually hurt people -- the "hard sciences." Nice ad hominem but I'm none of those things. I work in clinical trials, one of the few areas where we actually do have to know things, and a very good empirical demonstration of exactly how incredibly difficult that is.

elliotto 2y ago
I'm curious to hear your perspective on the validity of psychology / psychiatry / sociology as someone adjacent to the field. I am a hard science maths / data science guy, but unlike a lot of my peers I have a great interest in softer reasoning (philosophy, ethics, political science etc). But I am constantly disappointed by how tainted by ideology psychology and psychiatry feel (and economics, but this is a different discussion). Do you think that psychology and psychiatry are held to the same rigour as harder sciences and should be considered as valid?
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  All fields of inquiry are tainted by ideology. Read the history of literally any scientific field ever. The entire system is designed to accept this as fact, because science is done by humans, and to still arrive at the truth nonetheless. If we take those two observations: a) science is done by humans and b) humans have motivations, obviously the way to arrive at truth is to allow for most things to be wrong most of the time. This is the process by which we've learned every single thing about the universe. I don't know what you mean by "held to the same rigor." I don't think any psychologist on the planet would tell you we understand psychology as well as we understand basic chemical reactions.

elliotto 2y ago

I'm curious to hear your perspective on the validity of psychology / psychiatry / sociology as someone adjacent to the field. I am a hard science maths / data science guy, but unlike a lot of my peers I have a great interest in softer reasoning (philosophy, ethics, political science etc). But I am constantly disappointed by how tainted by ideology psychology and psychiatry feel (and economics, but this is a different discussion). Do you think that psychology and psychiatry are held to the same rigour as harder sciences and should be considered as valid?

llamaimperative 2y ago
All fields of inquiry are tainted by ideology. Read the history of literally any scientific field ever. The entire system is designed to accept this as fact, because science is done by humans, and to still arrive at the truth nonetheless. If we take those two observations: a) science is done by humans and b) humans have motivations, obviously the way to arrive at truth is to allow for most things to be wrong most of the time. This is the process by which we've learned every single thing about the universe. I don't know what you mean by "held to the same rigor." I don't think any psychologist on the planet would tell you we understand psychology as well as we understand basic chemical reactions.