That's actually somewhat true. The standard model was put together ala Frankenstein by physicists using sheer experimental data and lots of smarts, but it was deduced by some mathematician dude using mathematical theory (kaluza-Klein) waaaaay before that, yet people never knew about it because a) he wasn't famous and b) the World War fucked Europe up.The Shade said:Psychology is a derivative of mathematics. Just like everything else.
![]()
Now tell me that isn't a science. Anything that claims to be Psychology but is not scientific is not Modern Psychology.British Psychological Society said:If you tell your friends you are interested in psychology, common reactions might be 'well can you tell what I'm thinking then?' or 'Psychology? That's all just common sense isn't it?'
But psychology is actually based in science and psychologists learn the scientific basis of human behaviour by observing, measuring, testing, and using statistics to show that what they find is reliable evidence and not just down to chance.
I agree completely. In my mind, Anthropology is a softer science than Psych. With many anthropology courses you learn about how experts study artifacts and then deduce what they were used for. This is softer science than trying to test spatial awareness in a maze, or seeing what happens when you alternate color patterns on a wall in front of a child while monitoring their eye movements to determine what patterns and colors are most visible.FightThePower said:Thank you. Actually, I'll write that again in big letters:high_castle said:This isn't even debatable, and I'd be surprised if any of the kids debating this in your school have ever actually taken psychology (few schools offer a comprehensive course in it, just overviews that gloss over the hard facts). If you study it in college or post-graduate, you'll find it's a much "harder" science than most people assume. It's very much concerned with the flow of information along the nervous system in addition to the fields of behavior.
I hate when people debate the validity of something they don't understand. Study it for four years and get back to me.
[HEADING=3]THANK YOU[/HEADING]
Like I said, as someone who does Psychology as a degree, there is nothing more frustrating to see people say "it's not a science" when I've taken my time to study it properly and know that they are compeltely wrong.
It's like when people say "you know we only use 10% of a our brains". Most irritating myth ever.
Name a Psychological construct that has proven validity in a non-laboratory test. It's still all theory that works "some" of the time. A Hard Science would need it to work all of the time.Phyroxis said:Untrue. Look at the application facets of Social or Industrial/Organizational psychology. They apply psychological theory and scientific findings to the "real world" and get pretty good results.The_root_of_all_evil said:It's a soft science. It deals with theory rather than practical implications.
Science in general is the ordered process of deciphering the laws of the Universe, as they pertain to us.crudus said:What is the rest of science?The_root_of_all_evil said:It's a soft science. It deals with theory rather than practical implications.
The problem is that psychology deals with living beings and not objects or mathematic theories and therefore there will probably never be a 100% complete thing, ever in psychology. (It still is a part of science), did you come up with "soft science" or is it something they actually use to tell how well a theory works in a natural environment or have I completely misunderstood you?The_root_of_all_evil said:Name a Psychological construct that has proven validity in a non-laboratory test. It's still all theory that works "some" of the time. A Hard Science would need it to work all of the time.Phyroxis said:Untrue. Look at the application facets of Social or Industrial/Organizational psychology. They apply psychological theory and scientific findings to the "real world" and get pretty good results.The_root_of_all_evil said:It's a soft science. It deals with theory rather than practical implications.
That's why it'd defined as soft as things can't be 100% proven. It's not an insult, just an expression.Guffe said:The problem is that psychology deals with living beings and not objects or mathematic theories and therefore there will probably never be a 100% complete thing, ever in psychology. (It still is a part of science),
Nope, been around long before me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_sciencedid you come up with "soft science" or is it something they actually use to tell how well a theory works in a natural environment or have I completely misunderstood you?
I remembered a psychological test that works all the time!!!The_root_of_all_evil said:That's why it'd defined as soft as things can't be 100% proven. It's not an insult, just an expression.Guffe said:The problem is that psychology deals with living beings and not objects or mathematic theories and therefore there will probably never be a 100% complete thing, ever in psychology. (It still is a part of science),
Nope, been around long before me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_sciencedid you come up with "soft science" or is it something they actually use to tell how well a theory works in a natural environment or have I completely misunderstood you?
Soft Computing may provide the answers you seek as that's basically fuzzy logic.