Posted on 07/13/2012 1:03:03 PM PDT by Sir Napsalot
Psychologist Timothy D. Wilson, a professor at the University of Virginia, expressed resentment in his Times Op-Ed article on Thursday over the fact that most scientists don't consider his field a real science. He casts scientists as condescending bullies:
"Once, during a meeting at my university, a biologist mentioned that he was the only faculty member present from a science department. When I corrected him, noting that I was from the Department of Psychology, he waved his hand dismissively, as if I were a Little Leaguer telling a member of the New York Yankees that I too played baseball.
"There has long been snobbery in the sciences, with the 'hard' ones (physics, chemistry, biology) considering themselves to be more legitimate than the 'soft' ones (psychology, sociology)."
The dismissive attitude scientists have toward psychologists isn't rooted in snobbery; it's rooted in intellectual frustration. It's rooted in the failure of psychologists to acknowledge that they don't have the same claim on secular truth that the hard sciences do. It's rooted in the tired exasperation that scientists feel when non-scientists try to pretend they are scientists.
That's right. Psychology isn't science.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
It’s an OpEd from the LA Times. Always go with News/Activism, unless it’s obvious trivia. The social sciences have infected our politics with some of the worst nonsence and which came first chicken or egg arguments.
Just like Global Warming and Darwinism.
The anti-scientific cast of Freud's mind is clearly indicated by his attempt to bolster his fantasy of the Oedipus complex by a pseudo-scientific theory of the inheritance of impulses from primitive ancestors who murdered their tribal father to acquire his harem of females. When it was pointed out to him that the Lamarkian theory of acquired characteristics was entirely discredited, he querulously replied: "We can't bother with the biologists. We have our own science." - Freud and the Scientific Method
Since psychology is 100% opinion, and devoid of empiracy and objective analysis, there should be no attempt to call it science.
Its just another form of manipulation, seeking to alter reality toward acceptance of grossly deviant behavior, like homosexuality for example.
Your agitprop is what is commonly known as a Strawman argument.
Tom Cruise has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion, and was injected to deflect and discredit the discussion.
Psychologists do not “do science.”
They play “TV repairman” with your body, giving this drug or that, whatever is in fashion, much like a home owner of the ‘50s hauling all of the tubes of their TV set to the drug store in a bag, to be tested on the machine.
Its “wack a mole” or “skittle ball,” but certainly not science.
The way I knew that psychology wasn’t a science is that all the crazy people in college took a psychology degree. It seemed more like AA where the practitioners were also the patients.
How about the fact that the majority of psychology ‘studies’ are based on college students who need cash. Their responses are then extrapolated to the entire population. That’s not science.
Most psychology is the patient themselves talking out their problem or adversity, working on changing their reaction to it and enjoying a new, positive consequence. The fact that the psychologist has a sheepskin and the appearance of professionalism simply aids the process - a human placebo.
Don’t leave out that “scientist” Kinsey. He really helped people.
While I generally agree with the headline, there is some science beginning to enter the field. People are doing some really interesting work in the areas of functional neuroimaging and neurofeedback these days, and effectively treating ADHD without drugs, helping people with MTBI and even stroke recover, etc.
Psychologist Timothy D. Wilson... expressed resentment... over the fact that most scientists don't consider his field a real science. He casts scientists as condescending bullies... The dismissive attitude scientists have toward psychologists isn't rooted in snobbery; it's rooted in intellectual frustration. It's rooted in the failure of psychologists to acknowledge that they don't have the same claim on secular truth that the hard sciences do. It's rooted in the tired exasperation that scientists feel when non-scientists try to pretend they are scientists. That's right. Psychology isn't science.That's right, and there's also no such thing as hypnosis. /s Humans are merely walking, talking chemistry sets, and all ailments can be treated -- not cured, treated -- using medicines developed through scientifically rigorous double-blind testing, and *only* that way.
Alex B. Berezow:OTOH, I'll give him points for these:
Tom Cruise has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion, and was injected to deflect and discredit the discussion.
I made no argument concerning Tom Cruise, strawman or otherwise. It was an appropriate joke (and I think rather clever). It took nothing from the subject. The subject does not affect the life of a single person beyond some personal pride. You are an over-sensitive psychologist.
So...BuzzKillington.... take yourself less seriously, else some here might diagnose you with a mental condition (that Tom Cruise could help you with).
>>/nervously biting my nails <<
I can’t help but notice you have easily get nervous and you bite your nails when you do. Tell me, did your mother bite her nails when your father was nearby?
>>Not only is psychology not a science, it is a religion.
Just like Global Warming and Darwinism.<<
Saw that one coming from deep in left field...
Go ahead and add the religions of Geology and Astronomy to the list.
I can explain why AGW is not a science but someone has to know science to understand my explanation.
Funny you should ask, I remember this thing when I was 5 years old, and it was dark outside ........
You don't bother trying to explain your pseudo-scientific religious beliefs to others because you are too intellectually lazy to understand them yourself.
>>I don’t have to BELIEVE in science like you do, because I understand science.<<
One thing I can say with 100% assurance: you do NOT know science. You wouldn’t know a Scientific Theory if it bit you in the butt.
The fact I know science merely means I know science.
Your insult flinging, as usual, is mere amusement for me and entertainment for the rest of your crowd.
Even psychotherapy and his own field of psychoanalysis embrace ideas and perspectives that Freud rejected or would have rejected (though the analysts don't like to admit it).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.