Why do people think Psychiatry and Psychology are not Sciences?
They follow the Scientific Method.
They have Scientific Laws and Scientific Discoveries.
They have repeatable experiments.
Neurology, a physical science, has confirmed most of Psychiatrists claims.
Medications sedate and stimulate patients based on confirmed chemical imbalances and genetic disorders.
It's every bit as advanced as Physics, Chemistry and Genetics.
Are people just undereducated?
>>8031218
memes mostly
>>8031218
http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248
The same people that deny psychiatry and psychology are sciences are the same types of people deny that statistics and other forms of sciences [ie; evolution].
>>8031218
Psychology is pseudoscience
It's based almost entirely on self reporting and conjecture and the n values of most of the experiments, wew lad, it just cannot stand up to academic rigor
>It's every bit as advanced as Physics, Chemistry and Genetics
Bait/10 confirmed
>>8031224
>"nature.com"
Any real citations?
Psychiatry had NIMH.GOV
>Dot Gov
Also Colleges have Doctorates for both.
You know what they don't have Doctorates in?
Scientific Denialism.
It's a moot point anyway.
Even if half were false that doesn't discredit either.
>>8031227
> it just cannot stand up to academic rigor
Yet, Colleges have Doctorates for both.
>It's based almost entirely on self reporting and conjecture
Not true. Motives are looked at.
>Bait/10 confirmed
Denial isn't a counter argument.
>>8031219
No.
Psychology is an attempt by narcissists to play psychic, and they almost always project to make people seem less than they, they analyzer.
Psychiatry sells drugs and completely fabricated the DSM to shut up nonconformists and whistleblowers.
More than half of diagnosis have zero negative or harmful traits, such as energy levels, complaining about social issues, etc.
It's Eugenics to wipe out those that challenge egoism, specifically the egotism of psychiatrists.
>>8031230
Colleges also offer doctorates in sociology and English and history and a whole host of other fields
Doesn't make it science unless you're using a medieval definition of the word
Real science such as physics and biology adhere to laws of nature and make use of mathematical models that can be rigorously observed
Psychology does no such thing
>>8031231
I think there's a logical fallacy that describes your reasoning
I think it's straw-manning, but it's probably worse.
>>8031233
Sociology is a science.
No one is claiming English and History are.
That's some hardball strawmanning.
>Real science such as physics and biology adhere to laws of nature and make use of mathematical models that can be rigorously observed
Psychology does no such thing
Psychology is a diverse field, and most modern forms of Psychology support Psychiatry.
I find it odd how you don't say a thing about Psychiatry, which Psychology has a partnership study with.
I think your beliefs are outdated.
>>8031218
It lacks empirical evidence psychometrics and self reported, expert assigned valuations, or arbitrary placements on a qualitative spectrum are not based in physical measurement.
>>8031234
You can't "think" there is a fallacy.
You can POINT OUT a fallacy being committed.
And I didn't straw man because I didn't discount someone's views by pretending to know their views and speak for them.
Psychologists have been parodied for decades for pretending to known unknowns, based on "intuition" and stereotyping. They play pretend psychic.
Some prominent psychiatrists have come out of the woodwork admitting to serious issues not only in the DSM, but also in diagnostic practices. The psychiatrist that coined the term "narcissistic abuse" applied it to psychiatry right after he applied it to parents.
The National HEAT Taskforce has also jailed hundreds of Psychiatrists for faking medical paperwork in order to hold people against their will and demand public aid in their name.
Then there's the entire "political abuse of psychiatry" issue.
>>8031235
>Sociology is a science
It's literally people cherry picking historical happenings and current events to support their ideas. It's riddled with confirmation bias, lacks the ability to be tested, and is unfalsifiable. Only psychology undergrads think it's science
Social """""science""""" is not science
Again it lacks mathematical backing and basis in physical laws
Psychiatry is no different from psychology other than the practitioners having gone through medical school
Neither one is science
>>8031237
>It lacks empirical evidence psychometrics
The measurements are not quantitative, they're qualitative.
- Retarded Speech
- Impaired Judgement
- Delusions
- Self Harm
- Manic Behavior
- Inconsistency
These are not subjective nonsensical non-physical concepts.
They're reportable and diagnosable.
No different than any Medical Science.
In fact, the criteria in the DSM may be the most well thought advanced form of criteria labeling to date in any Science.
Next you'll be saying that doctors lie and are part of a conspiracy to sell drugs or abduct people and be mean to them because they're greedy bad people.
>>8031242
>In fact, the criteria in the DSM may be the most well thought advanced form of criteria labeling to date in any Science.
Funny how it changes based on political trends
You're mostly right until 'advanced as', which is obviously bait, but I'll bite.
Psychology is a necessary discipline but one which is very difficult to get right. The nature of their results being (mostly) derived from patient self-reporting means accuracy is not going to be of the same quality as in the natural sciences, but this doesn't preclude finding meaningful data, as evidenced by the existence of the field after all these years.
Also psychology tends to attract less talent than say, mathematics, so the average quality of research is going to be lower.
I'm not going to stick around, but I throw in a little question here for the people who are so certain that psychology is not a science
Do you believe epidemiology is a science?
Not unlike parts of psychology it also deals with unreliable data and flawed models and has to try to overcome these deficiencies with statistics.
>>8031240
>The Milgram Experiments
>The r/K Rat Experiments
Those are Sociology experiments that have been repeated. It's also falsifiable.
Social Science is Science of Qualitative not Quantitative.
Psychiatry is a both a Social Science and Physical Science. It's based on empirical Neurology but the diagnosis is based on Psychological reports.
If neither were a Science then:
1.) Wouldn't be Doctorate degrees for them
2.) They wouldn't involved in Government and Courtrooms
3.) They wouldn't involved in Science Academies
4.) People with multiple doctorates including them would have called out the lack of Science but they don't
And denying Psychiatry is akin to Scientology crying nonsense.
People are ill. If they didn't have diseases then they wouldn't be in hospitals.
Psychiatry is based on Neurology, Evolutionary Biology and Bio-Chemistry.
>>8031242
Those symptoms you listed are quantitative, there is nobody on the planet who doesn't suffer "impaired judgement" compared to AI Supreme Overlord.
>>8031247
>Science improves itself
>Psychiatry improves itself
>Therefor not a science
>Funny how it changes based on political trends
Rarely the case.
It was fair to suspect rare deviations that caused social issues and interpersonal issues could be due to brain difference and therefore neurological differences.
Homosexuality and Transgenderism were taken off because there was new data.
>>8031248
Not bait.
But your claim that the majority is based on patient self-reporting is untrue.
According to the World Health Organization most mental health patients report that they feel fine and don't think they're ill.
It's families and schools that discover the disorders; people with brain damage can't use their brain to tell they have brain damage.
It's when people stop doing what they're supposed to do or show deficits and weaknesses that proves the disease.
It's self evident.
It's scientific because not only do scientists practice it but it's one of the few sciences everyone practices because people report on others. These people need care and to have their lives helped. They can't integrate or function unless psychology and psychiatry are taken seriously as sciences.
These people aren't just "different"; they're diseased. They need medication and social placement.
>>8031250
>f neither were a Science then:
1.) Wouldn't be Doctorate degrees for them
2.) They wouldn't involved in Government and Courtrooms
3.) They wouldn't involved in Science Academies
You just described theology ~100 years ago which is what psychology is today, a religion operating under the guise of science except instead of looking to the Bible they look to the DSM which changes based on political trends
>>8031253
>Homosexuality and Transgenderism were taken off because there was new data
New data suggesting that they are not mental illnesses such as?
>>8031249
>epidemiology
Not a science.
Medicine may make use of Medical Science but Medicine itself it not a Science, nor is Epidemiology.
You can't call every thing disruptive a disease, nor can you pathologize everything people don't like.
Choices and behaviors are not diseases.
They may be symptoms of a disease, but "just happens to have a neurological chemical imbalance" is also not a disease; it's not a cause.
Then there are the patients that disagree with diagnosis. We we to believe billions of people are just wrong? There are hundreds of biases that can levied against people; how come these aren't ever looked at in the diagnostic process?
It's not in the DSM.
>>8031256
>You just described theology ~100 years ago which is what psychology is today,
Like other posters said; it's based on epidemiology, neurology, chemistry, etc.
>New data suggesting that they are not mental illnesses such as?
The earlier reports associated pathological behavioral patterns like pathological lying, emotional instability, irrational and harmful sexual behavioral mannerisms, lack of correct biological alignment, etc.
They learned more and found out these reports were incorrect.
>>8031258
so what you're saying is that you don't know what epidemiology is?
>>8031261
>epidemiology
I do know what it is.
It's a study, but not a scientific study.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology#Validity:_precision_and_bias
>>8031261
Experience can't cause disease.
That's not how disease is defined.
Also, Psychiatric epidemiology just isn't.
You can't XYZ a disease by ABC just because you want to.
There has to be evidence.
>>8031259
Epidemiology isn't science
>They learned more and found out these reports were incorrect
What a surprise, self reporting (which is the fundamental basis of psychology) has proven unreliable
From personal experience with psychiatrists I can tell you there is no science in it
I was wrongly accused of behaviors and my diagnosis changed a dozen times
I was told I had to be ill because I was called ill before
That's not science nor ever how science works you require evidence and proof
I was told I said things I didn't and was threatened to go along with the con for money purposes
Psychiatry and psychology are not science they're about projecting feelings and thoughts onto people then lying about it, to yourself and others, to keep your ego afloat
When asked for video interviews on all of their future clients [if the clients asked for it] 100% of psychiatrists refuse
They know they're lying and that's proof
>>8031270
>Epidemiology isn't science
^ Proof this is 4chan
>What a surprise, self reporting (which is the fundamental basis of psychology) has proven unreliable
Wrong and I already corrected that strawman.
It's from external reports. Observors.
>>8031262
so, let me get this straight
in >>8031258 you distinguished between medicine and medical science
you surmised that epidemiology is either part of or similar to the first rather than the latter
and the wikipedia article of it did not only fail to convince you otherwise, but you're actually trying to use it to prove your point
i see
>>8031242
Which means the non quantifiable "measurements" are not empirical, they are self justifying anecdotal semantics which is not how the scientific method works.
>>8031225
>that image
So we should all just build our own buildings, instead of blindly trusting engineers who go through arcane training that nobody understands?
>>8031277
>you distinguished between medicine and medical science
Medicine extends beyond Medical Science.
This is common knowledge.
>you surmised that epidemiology is either part of or similar to the first rather than the latter
Nope. You're projecting.
>and the wikipedia article of it did not only fail to convince you otherwise, but you're actually trying to use it to prove your point
The wikipedia article states very clearly there are too many biases and reports for it be a science. Science must have objective measurements.
Epidemiology has no fundamental objective basis when it comes to most diseases, and uses non-scientific ways of "determining" causes via the false attribution bias.
>>8031250
1) There are Doctorate degrees in religion
2) Religion is heavily involved in politics
3) Science Academies have Magic Groups, too
4) A lot of people call out psyche as bullshit, its why they add the soft or social caveat and put them in their own buildings far away from the real sciences
>>8031279
Empirical means it can be seen.
Quantitative and Qualitative can both be seen.
We arbitrary made up measures, that's a fact of history.
See the Mathematics documentary "How Long Is A Piece Of String" for more info.
>>8031259
>it's based on epidemiology, neurology, chemistry, etc.
Psychology predates all of those, how can it be based in them?
So what if psychiatry had to reclassify gays and transfags as not having a disease? Physics had to increase funding to study fluid dynamics because it was ignored for being too feminine.
>>8031284
>There are Doctorate degrees in religion
No, there are Doctorate degrees in STUDYING religion.
*facepalm*
>Religion is heavily involved in politics
And....?
>Science Academies have Magic Groups, too
What insane shit are you on about? Mentally ill detected. Proof positive.
>A lot of people call out psyche as bullshit
Did you seriously just try to use argumentum ad populum? A fallacy?
>>8031276
Epidemiology is not science it's simply study, there is a difference
>It's from external reports
Which are riddled with confirmation bias because the entirety of psychology is composed of philosophical musings about why people behave the way they do
And when psychological hypotheses get proven true that is largely a result of self fulfilling prophecy from the patient
>>8031231
psychiatry is a branch of medicine, not psychology
>>8031286
>it's based on epidemiology, neurology, chemistry, etc.
>Psychology predates all of those, how can it be based in them?
The same way other Sciences connect to other Science over time and improve each field.
>Chemistry predates Atomic Physics, so it can't be based on it
^How 4chan thinks.
>>8031291
Psychiatrists don't diagnose, they only prescribe medications.
90% of diagnosis in the United States are done by those with Masters in Social Work working as psychotherapists.
They give the diagnosis to the Psychiatrists and they prescribe the pills.
All the contact they have with patients is asking how the medicine makes them feel.
>>8031285
Empirical implies physical evidence based on direct consistent observation and physical evidence implies some quantifiable observable, not something vague semantic framework with numerous spectrums of interpretation based on individual training, skill, and experience.
>>8031295
>sanitary system is shit in the US
>therefore branch X of medicine is useless
malpractice is not uselesness
>>8031297
You were fine until you got to the quantifiable part.
It can be qualitative or quantitative.
Otherwise 99.9% of Science isn't Empirical.
>>8031218
Psychology has an enormous problem with replicability which, combined with its extreme politicization, makes for really bad science (see, decades of "muh stereotype threat" and it doesn't even fucking exist).
>>8031298
>malpractice is not uselesness
Yes it is. That's how malpractice is defined.
And if there are series of malpractice going on?
A person going though dozens of corrupt doctors?
And this is more widespread than legitimate practices?
Then it's useless.
If the number of patients is growing at an epidemic/pandemic rate, where is the medicine and science?
>>8031300
That's not the only problem.
You can't have dozens of foundational systems that contradict each other and call it a science.
Then there are the fallacies/biases directly attributed to psychology:
The Psychologists Fallacy
The Martha Mitchell Effect
>>8031301
If one is doing math badly, that does not invalidate math.
If one does psychiatry badly, that does not invalidate psychiatry
>>8031306
But psychiatry has no foundational proof.
That invalidate the argument and supposition.
The badly done versions of the ruse are just extras proving it a waste of time.
>>8031306
If one does math badly then there is no consequence beyond a bad grade or failure to validate your hypothesis
If one practices medicine badly it can cost lives
>>8031306
You can't practice something badly.
You either practice it or you don't.
If you don't do it correctly, then you're not doing it.
No on is doing it correctly? Where is the evidence of it's existence?
>>8031311
And that is why you should persecute malpractice,I'm not arguing that. Psychiatry is riddled with mumbo-jumbo pseudoscience, money milkers and so on, but, in itself, is not different from any branch of medicine (if done correctly.)
The problem is that psychiatry gets a free pass when every other field has to go under rigorous scrutiny, so of course dubious "practises" flourish since there is little or no regulation
>>8031295
It's true. I pretended to have ADHD to get those sweet meds and become like erdos. I just met with a nice idiot woman who wasn't a doctor, just a listen lady. I told her my fee fee's and she agreed that if I say I have ADHD, then I must have it. She rang the psychiatrist on the phone and told him to write me up for a fat prescripsh of the good stuff.
>>8031288
Divinity Schools give out doctorates too and they give them out for a lot of wacky stuff.
And... Politics and Unscientific Speculation are not as mutually exclusive as you implied.
Magic and Illusionist shows rely heavily of physics and MIT has had an Illusionists Club for a while.
I just pointed out that your claim that nobody with doctorates dislikes psychology is bullshit, then entire academic scene is set at separating the hard sciences from the soft ones and just googling psychology is not a science leads to multiple scientists with degrees like Alex Berezow or Hank Cambell who have written op eds denouncing psychology.
>>8031315
>You can't practice something badly
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>>8031317
It's also nearly impossible to prove that dubious psychiatric practices have been carried out when the field lacks reproducibility and falsifiability
>>8031320
Strawman mockery.
No. Here are the facts:
- Millions of young kids = ADHD
- Millions of teens = Bipolar
- Millions of homeless = Bipolar/PTSD
- Millions of complainers = Borderline
- Millions of criminals =ASPD
- Millions of whistleblowers = All the Above
Do you see a pattern appearing?
It's tactical targeting to silence people's behaviors because they're not being submissive.
Heat Taskforce has locked up hundreds of doctors for medicare and medicaid fraud in the last year due to malpractice of psychiatry.
Social service agencies are demanding clients fake illnesses or "accept" referral-based diagnosis for services [social services gets grants and psychiatrists get medicare/medicaid and grants].
Then there are religious parents that push for diagnosis.
Same is true for schools.
Then there is the whole foster care fiasco.
>>8031299
No, real sciences develop actual physical metrics, I wouldn't doubt that to someone who thinks psychology is a science 99.9% of the things you think are a science probably are not empirical.
Qualitative specifically means measurable semantics and quantitative means objectively measurable, so are you saying you think you can base a science on either measurement or constructing definitions that can't even be measured?
>>8031322
Denialism isn't a counter-argument.
Do you have anything intellectual to offer?
>>8031328
That story is true anon. Though I don't know why I wrote it in that ridiculous fashion.
>>8031292
Chemistry isn't based on Atomic Physics.
>>8031228
Nature is pretty much the best source there is
>>8031334
You can't have chemistry without atoms.
>>8031339
ok i lol'd
I dont trust any "law" of nature - whether it be physical or sociological- that isnt at least invariant under a generalized coordinate transformation.
Psychology has a long way to go before it's results are independent of the particulars of the data gathering and analyzing process.
>>8031333
My foster parents/affluent school: adhd
Then: Bipolar/Depression
Then desperate private social services and private attached psychiatric practice?
PTSD, Depression
They claimed I had borderline traits, narcissistic traits, self harmed, tried suicide, had poor judgement and no sense of self identity.
I all, they forced me on 15 meds, she hated me in school, scapegoated me in school, held me against my will, stigmatized me into submission and them institutionalized me and lied about what I said.
I have met hundreds of psychiatrists and therapists.
I have only met one honest psychiatrist.
The original accusers were just bullies, not doctors. They claimed they didn't need evidence, they just "knew" I was inferior and unstable. So they attacked me and when I asked for help, they lied and said I started it.
With the stigma, the cycle came again and again.
Now I'm a sociopath. I trust no one and care for no one.
>>8031350
*In all
Not she; *they
Sorry, I'm watching a show and sometimes I type what I hear!
>>8031340
Apparently you can since chemistry predates the the atomic model, the atom isn't even atomic, and much of chemistry owes its properties to subatomic phenomena.
>>8031363
No. Inaccurate chemistry predates the atomic model.
Inaccurate isn't scientific.
>>8031364
Chemistry is still inaccurate or they wouldn't need to keep doing experiments. The scientific method is based on the assumption of experimental inaccuracy and peer review.
>>8031218
>Why do people think
"We all have a tendency to think that the world
must conform to our prejudices. The opposite view
involves some effort of thought, and most people
would die sooner than think – in fact they do so."
– Bertrand Russell, "The ABC of Relativity" (1925)
>>8031370
Do you even know how revision works?
Original terms for non-science can become science when there is enough evidence to support a branch that is reasonable.
The other branches of alternative fundamentals die.
>The scientific method is based on the assumption of experimental inaccuracy and peer review.
Not even close. In Psychiatry for instance, which is a science, people are presumed to have a disease if they match all the necessary criteria.
True until proven otherwise.
That is science. It's pathology.
Pathology is the centerpoint of science.
>>8031373
Appeal to authority is meaningless.
>>8031376
Except the diseases in psychiatry are diagnosed based upon self reporting and what the psychiatrist believes to be going on in the mind of the patient
That doesn't pass for science and it damn near doesn't pass for medicine either
>>8031381
Again, the majority of cases, via the World Health Organization, are not self-report.
They're discovered by other persons observing the individuals.
Epidemiology and pathology are scientific.
If you deny Psychiatry then you deny Neurology and Pharmacology.
>>8031376
So now, not only do you not understand how empiricism relates to physical measurement, but you don't know what peer review even means?
The newest DSM has eliminated the necessity of a specific diagnosis by creating a bunch of overlapping spectrums of self reported criteria that can all be treated with similar drugs and you can only presume its a disease if the patient reports discomfort, someone perfectly comfortable having a bipolar anxious borderline personality isn't even diagnosed even if they display all the symptoms.
>>8031384
>If you deny Psychiatry then you deny Neurology and Pharmacology.
No because they are mutually exclusive from psychiatry
>>8031390
>>8031390
Incorrect.
To get paid by insurance, a specific diagnosis must be made by law.
DSM 5 has multitudes more specific diagnoses than the DSM, but includes spectrums.
Yet you agree that the drugs CAN treat disorders, while claiming the disorders don't exist.
You're inconsistent.
Is it accurate and scientific or is it not?
>>8031391
Neurology cannot claim brain disorders without Psychiatric.
Yet Neurology does claim brain disorders.
And uses Psychiatric terms.
Same is true for Pharmacology.
>>8031400
There are brain disorders that do not involve psychiatry such as Lew Body and Alzheimer's
Pharmacology is the study of drug interactions, meaning everything from antibiotics to chemotherapy, so again the vast majority of pharmacology does not involve psychiatry in any way
You failed hard on that one
>>8031406
>There are brain disorders that do not involve psychiatry such as Lew Body and Alzheimer's
Oh, well I guess that means because there are a few that don't fit means we throw everything out then!
>Pharmacology is the study
Wrong. It is the study drug interactions, which follows pathology.
If we accept pathology, we must accept epidemiology. If we accept epidemiology, then we must accept scientifically accurate psychiatric epidemiology.
>>8031399
They overlap, so you can make whatever diagnosis you want, I was talking about the inner workings of psychiatry, not insurance protocol and bylaw creating a specific necessity that doesn't exist within the framework of the "science".
I said the drugs are interchangeable in some cases because they act like random drugs or even placebos in random brain chemistries and they randomly alter behavior and make people less uncomfortable, they don't cure disorders because the same behavior is only a disorder if it makes the person uncomfortable, you are making stuff up that I didn't say or imply at all.
>>8031410
Neurology is not based on psychiatry
>Pharmacology is the branch of medicine and biology concerned with the study of drug action,[1] where a drug can be broadly defined as any man-made, natural, or endogenous (from within body) molecule which exerts a biochemical and/or physiological effect on the cell, tissue, organ, or organism (sometimes the word pharmacon is used as a term to encompass these endogenous and exogenous bioactive species). More specifically, it is the study of the interactions that occur between a living organism and chemicals that affect normal or abnormal biochemical function. If substances have medicinal properties, they are considered pharmaceuticals.
You also don't have to accept everything that follows from a base proposition, to do so is to engage in the highest form of logical inconsistency
You fucked up pretty bad here
>>8031419
>wiki bias
>straw man argument
Not what I said.
I said they share language at times which is conclusive evidence that there is support from other fields.
You fucked up pretty bad with jumping the gun on the straw man arguments.
Who honestly makes straw man arguments these days anyway?
So we landed on Psychology being BS and Psychiatry being mostly a science, but an unrefined science.
Good enough for me.
>>8031575
we did?
good to know
someone should tell psychiatrists though
i suspect most of them still think psychiatry is a branch of medicine
i think they will be pleased to be upgraded to scientists
the psychology downgrade is a bit of a bummer, but we could compensate by elevating psychics and psychoanalysts from bs-artists to doctors and thus go full circle
Itt: iqfags and "evolutionary purpose"-fags btfo
>>8031329
There are tons of quantitative measures in psych research. It's not all qualitative and it's not all dsm based. Go look at a few journals like psych bulletin and review or journal of math psych. The willful ignorance on this board astounds me.
>>8031218
Psychiatry: make junkys out of prescription drugs.
Psychology: use methods that were designed by academics and catedratics.
Go do your homework somewere else you faggot.
Lazy piece of fuck.
>>8031224
The whole point of sociology is that it has to do with the society people interact with. Saying that the society hasn't changed since those tests were done is completely false. This has nothing to do with validity. It just means tests need to be redone and that's it's even more relevant to keep doing it then previously thought
>>8031218
>confirmed chemical imbalances
you are aware that the "chemical imbalance" theory of brain disorders has long been discredited right
>>8031274
>I was wrongly accused
>They know they're lying and that's proof
paranoid schizophrenic?
>>8031218
There really isn't a way to explain it, just look at psychology for yourself
what they do is observe things and then make claims with no basis in reality to get attention or promote political messages. It has been thousands of years since psychology first existed and yet nothing permanent or of value has come out of it. Math and science have create laws explaining the universe's behavior but psychologists are still making up new bullshit
>>8032104
to further on what i was trying to say: look at psychology, OP. There are hundreds of people contradicting eachother and making wildly different claims. In a true scientific field based off of fact this cannot happen
This is how irrational psychiatry students are.
This is actually how immature they are.
This is actually how they think and process information.
And this student's "rant"?
Given gleaming praise even though it's chalk full of cursing, narcissism, condescension, etc.
Psychiatry doesn't study brain disorders... it is a brain disorder.
>>8032091
No you moron.
See:
>>8031350
Here is what I was accused of:
ADD, Depression, Bipolar and PTSD.
When I tried reporting overdiagnosis, abuse, scapegoating and psychological abuse by the therapists, I was diagnosed with NPD and PPD.
When I tried to speak about these issues louder, I was called "psychotic" and "delusional" and was dictated to I had dishonest motivations and was mistaken or paranoid.
All without asking for proof.
Not subjective evidence, but proof.
And I have it.
The original accusers, whom admit they're stupid liars that never thought the consequences would get out of control... admit it freely that they lied.
Every professional since then hates it when I call their coworkers liars and idiots for pushing agendas without reviewing evidence, and instead admit to trying to "correct" [punish] me for my own good by lying on paperwork to push me into the "criticizers are insane" category.
I even have proof that a social service director tried to have me silenced so they could lie on records to obtain grant money; I recorded our conversation.
So, no. I'm not insane in the slightest.
And no, no amount of projection, confirmation bias, or gaslighting is going to work on me.
I've published 2 volumes on psychological abuse, gaslighting, fallacies, bias and circular reasoning.
Try again.
>>8032630
>>8031341
>the mental gymnastics psychologists have to go through
>>8031218
The scientific method does not include a term for making statistical observations.
>>8032705
Yes it does.
1.) Induction
2.) Statistics
>>8032723
That's not the scientific method.
>>8032734
You can't science without induction and statistics.
Look at all the anti-psychiatry anti-science /b/tards on here.
This is a cringe thread.
"Science isn't science"
"Science isn't real"
"Psychiatry isn't science"
"Medicine isn't science"
"It's a conspiracy!"
"Evolution is a lie!"
Jesus fucking christ.
I mean, I get attacking psychology, but psychiatric medicine?
And the "big pharma is a conspiracy!" bullshit is getting tired.
Next tell me they don't wish to cure disease because it's profitable to sell continual treatments.
This is an aids thread.
Go back to /x/ and /pol/.
>>8032751
1. Induction occurs at the step after observation, not at the observation step. Observing and thinking of an interesting question are two different things.
2. Statistics aren't data, they are an analysis of a data set.
Please kill yourself rather than posting here.
>>8032961
1.) Semantics.
2.) Semantics. The collecting, using and analyzing statistics is both induction and statistics.
3.) This is an infallible axiomatic fact.
>>8032961
>"Analyzing statistics isn't statistics"
lol
>butthurt rage
lol
>>8032649
fight the good fight. you're not alone.
>>8032970
1. Labeling the wrong bubble isn't semantics.
2. Possibly. But I didn't use the term statistics in my original statement, so the way you meant to use the term is irrelevant to the way I used mine.
>>8032974
Irrelevant to my original claim. Different uses of the word by different parties does not affect the meaning of my original statement.
>>8032994
I'm the only one fighting on the level I'm fighting.
Officer of Inspector General
Internal Affairs
Social Security Administration
Department of Human Services
Departments of Public Social Services
Americans With Disability
County Mental Health
County Mental Health Court
Mental Health Patients Rights
Department Of Disability Rights
County Court Systems
School Systems
National Association of Social Workers
And that's on top of the Private Psychiatrists and Social Worker agencies that started this whole mess.
I am alone. Doesn't make me not human or not innocent though.
I'll "move" society if I have to [non-violently].
Motive is all I have left.
>>8033013
Induction is part of the observation process, because observation exists on priori trust.
Deny it if you want, but psychiatry is an accepted science.
>>8033020
this is officially the cringiest thing on 4chan and actually confirms your mental illness
>I'll "move" society if I have to [non-violently].
>Motive is all I have left.
XD
Go back to your anime faggot.
Science denial belongs in /x/
>>8032649
> the workd is out to get me
Take your pills, schizo
>>8033024
>observation exists on priori trust
It doesn't. It exists on unknowns that can be trusted or distrusted. We're talking about observation in general, not observation in the field of psychology. There's no "direct" observation in psychiatry, and so it can't be a real science. It can be an honesty-based science, but not a real science. Honesty is a purely virtual concept.
>>8033030
I never said that.
I believe people egotistical and fall into social, inertia, narcissistic, etc... pitfalls.
And I was accused first, which does actually confirm that someone was out to get me.
If people were never out to get anyone, we wouldn't have laws against it.
No, the world doesn't know I exist for the most part, but some people are wrongfully accused and then stigmatised.
Then they are attacked and accused over and over and projected upon while people confabulate.
History has proven this to be true.
So go ahead and call me names.
It means nothing.
I have one question:
Where is your proof, you delusional egotist?
>>8033030
Strawman and bulverism?
Fallacy combo breaker?
You just knocked yourself out.
>>8032056
Counting how many seconds it takes someone to report their happiness level number still isn't a legitimate measurement.
>>8033614
It's a legitimate measurement, we just have no way of knowing which of ten thousand hypotheses it actually measures for.
>>8033620
Self reported happiness level is still not an empirical unit of physical measurement just because you count the number of seconds and hand wave an actual physical unit into your arbitrary semantic valuation.
>>8033633
The self-reported happiness level isn't a measure, but the time to response is. Interpreting evidence is that hard part that makes psychology not a real science.
>>8033654
So if I count the number of milliseconds it takes to figure out you are a faggot, you acknowledge that you are legitimately a colossal faggot of the highest degree?
>>8033620
Again, you idiot:
1.) W.H.O. states the majority of reports are not self reports
2.) H.E.A.T. has found the majority of self reports are doctored for insurance fraud or silencing purposes
3.) No amount of report is a measurement; measurement requires objective tools
Do you even understand objectivity?
>>8033665
>that adds anything new
To what?
>have been rejected
By whom?
>>8033668
I acknowledge that some amount of time was put in to you figuring that out. The time it takes is a valid measurement but it has fuck all to do with whatever stimulus occurs then.
>>8033673
Every time you comment you get shot down by a rational argument yet you still insist on this emotional attachment to the idea that psychology does not follow the scientific method.
>>8033678
Except you still can't justify that psychology properly acquires direct physical evidence or develops its own physical metrics as a legitimate science should because you don't understand why soft science is a derogatory slur built into the foundation of academia.
>>8033678
You don't even know which comments are mine. If some other anon was acting that way and you think I'm that anon and that's the basis for your replies, then don't bother posting.
It is wrong to say that imbalances or disorders exist. Variation is the whole point of being a living thing.
>>8033695
While I agree, that's an /x/-type topic. In the real world we actually have to deal with people that can't control themselves. /x/ doesn't live in the real world, and thank god for that.
>>8031218
>inb4 feynman.memepeg
But isn't the main difference between the natural sciences and the social 'sciences' that the natural sciences have demonstrable and concrete laws of behavior, which are also predictive while being descriptive? More importantly that these laws happen to well quantified and not abstractly qualitative.
The one aspect of psychology that seems constant is the idea of the universal six types of emotion in humans. Beside that, higher functioning human behavior varies too subtly and wildly for any model to be predictive, when genetics and environment are taken into consideration.
But this just seems to be a repeated semantic argument; a cockfight over where the line should be drawn in the definition. For similar reasons as psychology, history could be considered a science as it uses the scientific method to examine evidence and draw conclusions. However, by the same marks as History, biology or zoology could be considered a humanity because all it does is catalogue events and already existent behaviors.
>>8031218
Not all psychology.
Psychoanalysis, though? That's some bullshit.
>>8033697
that's an anti-revolutionist mindset
>>8033720
I don't wear my revolutionary hat on /sci/. It's not useful here. There's nothing to revolt against. /x/ is the board I go to when I care to revolt.
>>8033697
But the diagnostic methods are dishonest, biased and jump to conclusions.
The DSM is authoritarian and anti-deduction.
People don't always have disorders, sometimes their lives are full of disorder and struggle because of unstable establishment and authoritarian types trying to apply force to irrational and inconsistent ideals.
>>8031242
The fuck?
EVERY GODDAMNED REAL MEASUREMENT IS QUANTITATIVE. When there is something, that's a 1. If it's absent, that's a 0.
Shit, have you ever spoken to an epidemiologist or even a real physician?
>>8033735
If it can't objectively be re-measured then that false-quantifying.
0% of studies have been able to get 100% using the false-quantifying method.
So, no. You're wrong.
>>8033734
>unstable establishment and authoritarian types trying to apply force to irrational and inconsistent ideals
Listen. I hear you, but that's an /x/ topic. You're not going to change geopolitics on /sci/. This just isn't the place for that. We can agree until we're blue in the face, but nobody comes to /sci/ to reform their political agendas. /sci/ has zero authority on how people live their lives and that's a really good thing.
>>8031218
Drug companies cherry picking the best studies and ignoring bad ones isn't science
>>8033752
First, English is your friend and you should learn to write in it.
Second, every absolute result on a conclusion is wrong, you dingus. That's logics 101. 100% as a result is ALWAYS wrong and you should look at the calculations then.
Third, what is the criteria for phenomena which can't be measured? Is it even scientific?
>>8031228
This is reverse bait or something
>>8033780
>Second, every absolute result on a conclusion is wrong, you dingus. That's logics 101. 100% as a result is ALWAYS wrong and you should look at the calculations then.
You tell me to use English and then you type gibberish,
>Third, what is the criteria for phenomena which can't be measured? Is it even scientific?
Also gibberish
And you don't know anything about logic.
Logic 101, which includes Epistemology 101, includes learning about fallacies.
So, let me start correcting you.
There are zero reproducible social science studies. That's a fact.
When I used 100%, I was stating an fact.
There are absolutes in regards to math.
Counting is absolute.
Second, there is no science in any social science at all.
Prove it otherwise.
>>8033828
>gibberish
>gibberish
>don't know anything about logic
>let me start correcting you
shit/shit, post discarded.
>>8033790
Crying isn't a counter-argument.
>>8033833
Denialism is fallacious.
Rejecting Epistemology is fallacious.
You're being illogical.
>>8031228
>Any real citations
This has to be bait, no one is that retarded
Psychology was created as marxist weapon against capitalist pigs. We must purge your unholy practices. You should feel bad and accept more immigrants and reestablish sharia. Islam will rule the world! ALLAHU AKBAR!
>>8033862
Nature.com isn't a respectiable citation.
Only .gov .edu and some .orgs are.
That's pretty much it.
>>8033881
Straw man
.
Psychology uses projection and confirmation bias and this has been confirmed by the consensus of people within the field.
Psychiatry has issues because of the "this has been proven" crap is often money/ego motivated lies, and the diagnosis system is heavily flawed.
This has also been heavily acknowledged within the consensus of the field itself.
Sorry that you picked a shit psuedo-science to defend.
I'm sorry you use fallacies because you think intuitive presumption and bulverism works.
Modern Psychology was was created by small-minded popular philosophers who were empowered by the success of Nietzsche to try and use assumed philosophical axioms to create a practical science of mind.
Psychiatry is medicine.
>>8033973
Acutaully that's incorrect.
Social Sciences following antipositivism were re-invented by the Frankfurt School for political reasons.
Philosophy had nothing to do with it.
Contrary to what people are miseducated on, philosophy doesn't make presuppositions, it questions them.
Philosophy is about skepticism and asking questions, and challenging presuppositions, thereby whittling away at lies.
Psychiatry is not medicine because they make bunk claims without proof.
The chemical imbalance thing isn't even a theory, it's a hypothesis, and one that's been disproven every time they claim they think they've proven it.
You can't just believe doxa.
Doxa is often wrong.
>>8033970
Are you a brother in Allah? He will deliver golden age for science.
>>8033991
I'm an atheist, a skeptic, a critic, an epistemologist and critical thinker.
>>8033996
Then you will have to pay jizya in the future.
>>8033999
Get back to /pol/
Islam will not outlive the fall the gasoline.
>>8031218
Isn't psychiatry like the only medical field which doesn't regularly use physical examination of the organ in question to aid diagnosis?
That alone should get you thinking.
>>8034080
They ask questions.
If you say no, they put down yes and make up quotes.
HEAT Task Force, a Government Task Force, states there is an estimates 4 billion dollars billed fraudulent diagnosis and "treatments" every year.
They're working on video-based sting operations, taking down over 500 psychiatrists, therapists and nurses in fraud and abuse so far.
Step two: tackling fraud social service agencies, schools and... finally... the police 5150 system [as well as internal affairs corruption]
>>8034099
I don't know why you'd even go to a psychiatrist
>>8031218
>psychiatry and pscyhology
>repeatable
>"confirmed" any claims
>advanced
>psychology and psychiatry
>science
not even once
Why don't test for high cortisone levels when accusing people of stress related disorders like anxiety?
I'm willing to bet accusers and mental health workers would test higher on cortisone level and other stress related biochemical markers.
I'm willing to be biochem toxicity [the point in which high and deprived level cause functionality issues] is common in bullies, authorities, drones, etc.
>>8034110
Most people are forced, according to the World Health Organization.
Look up the Rosenhan Experiments.
It's were psychiatrists pretended to fake non-psychiatric symptoms to other psychiatrists, and they were still accused of being mentally ill and locked up.
The system claims it's changed since then, but the only difference is that mental hospitalized are now privatized and run for profit... though the majority of their income still comes from public aid, public insurance, and public grants... and people still can't so "no"... even if they haven't committed a crime.
>>8034134
I already know of those experiments. That's pretty funny about people mostly being forced if it's true. Refusal of medical treatment should be enshrined in the bill of rights, or possibly even be included in the fundamental right to privacy.
I think when I was away from home for a whole day they put down that I had psychosis.
My mother called the police and they found me, she claimed I was away for 2 days. While I could prove I was away for just 1 day they never believe me when I correct them.
Also had to take anti-psychotics
>friend starts reading Freud
>suddenly psycho analizes everyone in our friendgroup
>constant dream interpetation shit, or asking shit why we do what we do
Fuck sake
>>8031218
Yes. Lets abolish everything except math, physics and chemist fields because its not scientific enough for sci.
Why is nature.com not a source?
>be a naive first year undergrad majoring in physics
>enrol in a social psychology class as an elective
>go into the class thinking it was going to be really interesting and eye opening
>first lecture was an indoctrination session
>SJW lecturer claims that evolutionary psychology is sexist and racist
>keeps rambling on about how social psychology contributes to the fight against white supremacy and patriarchy in western society
>I'm one of a small number of non-white people attending the lecture, the lecturer keeps looking at me like she wants me to give her a pat on the back throughout the lecture, internally I'm laughing hysterically
>second lecture, they try to drill into our heads that "psychology is a scientific discipline"
>they go over the standard experimental methods in social psychology
>vast majority of studies are done on psychology undergrads
>they don't repeat experiments
>they have a massive file drawer problem
So I decided to drop the course after that lecture because it was pseudoscience and because the lecturer was like a talking tumblr blog. A year later, this study is published:
http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/aac4716
No surprise at all. I would say that psychologists should step up their game, but let's be realistic here, in 10-20 years, advancements in cognative neuroscience will make psychology obsolete anyway so it doesn't matter.
By the same logic used by a lot of the people ITT, practically no medical branches are scientific fields. I'm alright with that deduction, but not when it's limited to psychiatry out of the whole array of medical specialties.
Some medical disciplines do utilize scientific research a lot more than others. Psychology may be entirely pseudo-scientific, but psychiatry is based heavily on neurology, biology and biochemistry -- it is the interface of psychology and science. There are bad doctors and good doctors every where, in every field. Sure, a bad psychiatrist may make quick assumptions and throw a prescription at you -- but their reputation would soon precede them. A good psychiatrist orders lab work to check serum levels for a variety of analytes, understands the role of neurology in major mental disorders, and so on to give you the best possible treatment. A lot of psychiatrists even practice in-patient procedures such as electro convulsive therapy, and they have a surprisingly good understanding of neuro-electrical activity as it correlates to mood disorders.
If you've ever been diagnosed, or know someone, with a major mental disorder such as bipolar, you'll be thanking your lucky stars that psychiatry exists to understand the mechanism causing symptoms and how to effectively treat it.
And for the record, no MD walks around proclaiming that they're a scientist unless they're actively pursuing research. It's pretty much just you morons that sit here and get butt-blasted about it.
>>8031305
Actually you could when talking about the neuro-meta. Just think how complex the brain is, how certain cognition can work against other faculties. Think the catch-22 of depression: I can do x to fix y but I don't feel like it. So to derive any system from such conflict, the system in and of itself requires conflict until it can be objectively assessed as it matures, which will be many, many years from now.
>>8034343
You could have purely neurological conditions that are identifiable by looking at clusters of neurons, but without the proper research in psychology to interface with technological advancements you'd still be a long ways from understanding behavioral disease.
