That's the magic of 1984.

2 + 2 doesn't equal 4.

And it doesn't equal 5 either.

2 + 2 equals whatever the SJW wants it to be.

Same criticism of economics and all social sciences. How do you quantify the qualitative? And how do you experiments where the main variable has free will and we don't know how to define it yet (human mind).

Experimentation on Being For Itself and experimentation on Being in Itself is different. Humans are not coffee tabled. Psychology is the scientific study of the brain and personality, thinking, etc. Considering they are studying something very different than boring coffee tables or other things that can be measured with rulers of various sorts, they need a different approach.

Marx more or less created social science when he wrote Kapital. Some say The Wealth of Nations was the first modern economic text but it wasn't scientific so it was still political-economy, a humanity. Durkheim studied suicide. Weber studied how calvinism and ideas of predestination led to capitalism but i don't think it meets the threshold of science and is a humanity like Wealth of Nations...it was more a nietzschean geneological account of the idea.

So its hard to replicate an experiment on people when they're all different, coffee tables are the same. And coffee tables don't have biases, disclosure issues, ethical limits. Handcuffs mentioned the Stanford Prison Experiment not being able to pass an institutional review board now and its true that social sciences are limited to being pleasant in a world that is anything but.

So the subject is much harder to study and understand. We've figured out many aspects of the human body but not the mind at all.




I'll engage him in good faith despite his heavy biases in this topic.

If you spend your whole life studying coffee tables then the human body and mind might be confounding. Sometimes to human body and mind isn't concrete enough for coffee table people.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jul 29 2020 06:17am

A religious acquaintance who insisted circular logic was perfectly valid told me the same thing a decade ago. What are the basics? I wouldn't be surprised if it involves substantially lowering the standards of what it means to measure something.

Give the most convincing example of using psychometrics to measure any one of those things. Iirc IQ tests may fall into this category but soft scientists are working to deny the validity of it.

Personality testing is extremely complicated and not in my scope of practice. I'm not a psychologist. My old boss was an organizational psychologist PsyD and he was very talented. I seen some formal personality testing stuff and it seems complicated. It isn't a Myers-Briggs test pop psychology test lol.

It was far more advanced than things I worked with in my limited undergraduate science experience that was mostly focused on biology and human development, to you know, detect when people are behind on developmental milestones etc.

I didn't respect psych a lot until i got to work with a few effective PsyDs. Most PsyDs are overpaid social workers for sure lol.

i have a general question:

1. do therapists then deserve a modicum of legal responsibility if pill cocktails lead to suicides in patients not previously suicidal?

2. how do we give therapists agency to prescribe hormones to children to block puberty if their entire field is basically guesswork?

i personally think therapists need major oversight in pill cocktails prescribed to treat mild to medium depression when it leads to self harm. and i personally think most of gender science is simply about harm reduction for a group that is highly suicidal statistically. essentially guesswork to try and reduce a glaring problem. and id be fine with this is super pro trans advocates didnt act like gender therapists were working off solid science.

in essence why do we give therapists a lack of responsibility and also legal credence? i personally dont see much more validity in all of psychology than astrology. oh wow u called out that a person who's father left them and who's husband cheated on them has trust issues, spot on!

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jul 29 2020 09:14am

Both of those are psychiatrists, not psychologists. Psychiatrists follow practice guidelines based on evidence and recommendations by professional organizations and published trials on people.

Psychiatrists have a far higher bar to clear than psychologists since psychiatrists are actual medical doctors

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 29 2020 10:18am

both psychologists and psychiatrists draw from psychology tho correct? i dont respect psychology very much. that's not to say it's flat earth, but i find most conclusions to be so self evident they're useless. i frankly would go so far as to say i dont respect the medical degree of a psychiatrist, they're essentially brain massage therapists.

Psychiatrists have the same medical degree as a brain surgeon.

Psychiatry is a doctor that did a residency in psychiatry. Same as a surgeon is a doctor that did residency in surgery. They have the same 4 years of training before that.

Getting approval for treatments is a much higher bar than publishing in a. Psychology journal. Theyre really 2 different worlds.

where is the info i dont already know tho lol?

im saying most 4 year psychiatrists should be 2 year psychologists and have their ability to prescribe drugs taken away. first reason because i find this practice overdone and dangerous, but also the root of both is flawed, that being psychology.

oddly enough surgeons can and do replicate results, and they're dealing with generally static anatomy. a heart surgeon might find an irregular heart once a year if he does a surgery 300 times that year, to a psychiatrist every brain is irregular and a puzzle they have to figure out.

none of this is a condemnation of psychiatry generally or those in therapy, just as a masseuse not having a medical degree doesnt invalidate them. psychologists can and do deal with trauma, depression, etc. i know many and they do great work.