Is psychology a science?

[HeyListen]

This is a debate that had hit our school recently, and I wouldn't mind getting some objective opinions. Many people claim that psychology isn't a "science," and I can see where they're coming from. Psychology deals with much more abstract principles than sciences like physics or chemistry, as the rules are malleable.

I maintain personally that psychology, by following the scientific method and emploiying empirical function, is in fact a valid science (though I do recognize how it is very unique.)Psychology, regardless of what it is, is probably one of the most rapdily expanding fields at this point in time, and this is why so many of us want to know how to classify it.

 

[Nimbus]

It is a science in its infancy. We don't know anything for certain, but only because it's such a new field. Give it a thousand years, and then we'll see how "scientific" it is.

 

[Dango]

1. Your avatar brings back good memories.

2. I think yes, as it has to do with the study of the human mind. But I'm also terrible at science, so don't ask me.

 

[Furious Styles]

No, not yet. Having done psychology I can tell you that there are too many conflicting theories and approaches to the subject for it to be a science. When some of them are wheedled out, then maybe.

 

[Good morning blues]

There is some psychology that is very scientific, and you really can't argue against it; the more physical branches, such as neuropsychology, are pretty much pure science. Other types cross the whole spectrum from a very specialized hard science (neuropsychology) to a more abstract yet still scientific method (congitive psychology) to complete quackery and pseudoscience (Freudian psychoanalysis).

 

[kc_lax]

i may be biased here as i'm a psychology student but i'm going to say yes it is a science as like in many forms of science we test theories and hypothesese using dependent and independent variables in lab experiments and although it could be argued that we can't always see what the theories are based, you could say the same about any science, for example the orignal theory or protons and electrons couldnt be proven till years after, the idea of alleles also took a long time to prove from it original theory so like those it may take time to prove our theories, as it will with any new scientific theories (no matter the field)
also theres a lot physiology within psychology

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I thought part of Psychology also has to do with brain chemistry (ie chemicals in brain) therefore making it undoubtedly a science... I say this because I have a "chemical imbalance" that causes bipolar symptoms.
However I wouldn't call it an "exact" science due to the amount we actually know about the human mind being so little...

 

[lacktheknack]

It isn't, due to the many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many conflicting theories. I'll stick to neuroscience to tell me how my brain works, thanks.

 

[lukemdizzle]

technically it is classified as a social science because there are both objective and subjective elements to psychology

 

[sharkinz]

It is a science in its infancy. We don't know anything for certain, but only because it's such a new field. Give it a thousand years, and then we'll see how "scientific" it is.

A thousand Years? Most sciences (physics, chemistry, biology) have only existed in their modern forms for about 400 years. To reply to the original purpose of the thread, yes psychology is a science. It uses the scientific method to solve problems and answer questions. Some people say its a "soft" science which I think is ridiculous. Being called "soft" implies that it has less merit then the "hard" sciences like chemistry. I once had it explained to me like this, you cant be kinda pregnant. Either you're pregnant or you aren't. Science is the same way, either you are a science or you're not.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

I study it and I say it is, theories are a necessary part of science

 

[Firoth]

Yes, because it ends with "ology" which means "the study of."

(Scientology does NOT count.)

 

[lukemdizzle]

It is a science in its infancy. We don't know anything for certain, but only because it's such a new field. Give it a thousand years, and then we'll see how "scientific" it is.

A thousand Years? Most sciences (physics, chemistry, biology) have only existed in their modern forms for about 400 years. To reply to the original purpose of the thread, yes psychology is a science. It uses the scientific method to solve problems and answer questions. Some people say its a "soft" science which I think is ridiculous. Being called "soft" implies that it has less merit then the "hard" sciences like chemistry. I once had it explained to me like this, you cant be kinda pregnant. Either you're pregnant or you aren't. Science is the same way, either you are a science or you're not.

It uses the scientific method at times but when it comes to answering some tricky questions like do we have free will or are we products of our environment or anything in-between psychology can be very subjective. (none of froyds theories were based on the scientific method). this is why psych. is officially a social science, which is the official way of saying sort of science. I just took a class on this

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

It's a soft science. It deals with theory rather than practical implications.

 

[lukemdizzle]

Its defined as a science, so yes. Is it as valid as the other sciences? yes. Do people know anything about, well anything? no.

It is not defined as a science it is defined as a social science. see last post

 

[lukemdizzle]

It's a soft science. It deals with theory rather than practical implications.

there are branches of psych that deal with practical implications. mostly on the chemistry and education sides. but because there are so manny things that are based on observation and not experiment it is considered social science. which is a way of saying soft science but soft science can be offensive to psychologists

 

[HeyListen]

Experimentation is a major part of psych, just as much as it is in chem. You uncover new inormation about how the mind works through specifically designed experiemts. If it weren't for experimentation, psych would be nowhere. I think "social science" is kind of a placeholder category for it, seeing as nobody can come to a conclusion as to where it belongs.

 

[bojac6]

No, not yet. Having done psychology I can tell you that there are too many conflicting theories and approaches to the subject for it to be a science. When some of them are wheedled out, then maybe.

It isn't, due to the many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many conflicting theories. I'll stick to neuroscience to tell me how my brain works, thanks.

That doesn't make it not a science. On the contrary, the fact that we all acknowledge there are ways to wheedle down the theories and make them more accurate is the very definition of science.

There were hundreds of conflicting theories about what stars were, from dead ancestors to paintings of the gods. Does that mean that the astronomy practiced by Babylonians, Egyptians and Greeks was not actually a science? Of course not, because they all presented theories valid with the information at hand and these theories were dismissed as further evidence was discovered.

Being wrong does not make something not science. Being a new field, so that we know very little and have many conflicting theories does not mean something is unscientific. Science is a method of examination, it's a system of evidence collection and theory development. Science is not a field, it is much broader than that. It's more of a philosophy than anything else.

Is psychology a science? Do psychologists formulate theories based on real world observations, then test this theories, adapting the theories to new results to better reflect their observations? Then yes, it is a science. Do psychologists make shit up, ignore evidence, and make crazy outlandish theories that have no basis in observation? Then no, it is not a science.

I would argue that any field from physics to psychology has people in both camps. I would further argue that the vast majority of people in these fields fall into the first kind and what they practice is science. And we view the rest, whether they are people who argue the world is flat, that fairies make cannonballs travel, or wacky psychological theories, are nutjobs, quacks, and not worth legitimate researchers' time.

 

[Mimssy]

It is a social science.