is Psychology science ?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-12-2011, 07:41 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
(12-12-2011 11:47 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Alrighty then. Ladies and gents, what we have here is a man; seriously knows his shit in biology if not all science. I'm thinking he's in the field, but he can tell his own story.

Welcome to the forum. This place ain't as lively as Rational Skepticism, but with HoC seemingly mr. science 'round here; you're already a plus.

The master's student The Bearded Dude seems to be our only other regular expert. He could use the company. Wink

Thanks for the welcome and run-down of the place, HoC! I do feel that you've exaggerated my abilities a little there - rather than being actually knowledgeable, I tend to just talk shit and expect everyone to believe the things I say.. Tongue

(12-12-2011 12:20 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Psychology makes part of the human sciences , so it's no exact science , it is really a pseudo-science with no scientific basis for the mst part at least

I touched on this issue above, but psychology is not part of the human sciences. Only part of psychology is concerned with humans, so it's inaccurate to lump it in the humanities or social sciences.

Areas of psychology, particularly behavioral psychology, are exact and part of the natural sciences.

(12-12-2011 12:20 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Neuro-psychology tries to have a scientific basis by relying on the scientific facts of neurology , but it remains a pseudo-science though because the nature & function of the human nature are not something material = immaterial

The nature & function of the immaterial dimention of man = the human spirit , will always be beyond humans ' & beyond science's reach , i guess, despite all the scientific advances in relation to the human consciousness

Psychology is not the study of the mind or spirit. Psychology is the study of behavior, and some definitions extend this to the study of mental processes as well, but both of which can be objectively studied.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mr.Samsa's post
12-12-2011, 07:49 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
(12-12-2011 03:01 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  
(12-12-2011 01:09 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(12-12-2011 12:20 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Psychology makes part of the human sciences , so it's no exact science , it is really a pseudo-science with no scientific basis for the mst part at least

Neuro-psychology tries to have a scientific basis by relying on the scientific facts of neurology , but it remains a pseudo-science though because the nature & function of the human nature are not something material = immaterial

The nature & function of the immaterial dimention of man = the human spirit , will always be beyond humans ' & beyond science's reach , i guess, despite all the scientific advances in relation to the human consciousness
That is incorrect. Your agenda is getting in the way of your rational information processor. Your will is to credit Allah and discredit science, but you are missing some terms in your polynomial. For instance, science must be the will of Allah, or there wouldn't be no science; and obviously you can know Allah, or you wouldn't be so quick to swing your sledgehammer. And thus the third postulate is falsified.

Ease up there AbdelZ. Watch where you're swinging that thing. Wink

Honest ? i do not know what you are talking about, buddy

Don't worry, many people don't.

However, your argument is totally invalid. You cannot use a religious belief to determine if something is or is not a science. That's just absurd.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-12-2011, 03:24 PM (This post was last modified: 13-12-2011 03:39 PM by AbdelZ.)
RE: is Psychology science ?
(12-12-2011 04:02 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Easy peasy. Let's start from the beginning. I.

I matter. See how easy that was? You know what else? You matter. Pretty cool for a Setian to have such insight into a Muslim, no?

That's psychology, is it not?

Here's another one for ya. There's 2 of me. The one who writes, now. The one who considers, always, and writes as an expression of consideration.

The first one can be said to be the "I" of now, a temporal, mortal being.

The second one can be said to be the "I" of eternity, an immaterial immortal soul.

Only the second one is where all the "issue" lies. There are those that contend this second "I" is the soul, and of god. And there are others, such as myself, that contend this second "I" is merely reinforced pattern arising from experience, empathy, and education.

But those three Es are not quantifiable. Do you fear that psychology and neuroscience are making inroads into quantifying that which is of god? Do you really think god is that limited? The enemy of god is not the infidel outside of self, it is the infidel within; that wishes to speak for Allah rather than listen to Allah.

All i am saying is that materialism as an Eurocentric ideology has been dominating in exact sciences = its own level , as well as in human sciences, excluding all non-materialistic paradigms in the process, especially those of religions for obvious ideological reasons , that's why materialism has been succeeding only at the level of the exact sciences = at the level of matter , not really at the level of human sciences for example , simply because materialism rejects the immaterial dimention of man = the most valuable dimention of man = the human spirit whose nature & function are far beyond humans' & far beyond science's reach : so, it's pretty handy for materialism because if materialism would acknowledge or recognize the very existence of the immaterial dimention of man as such , he would be in serious ideological paradoxical trouble haha


Even at the level of matter itself , both materialism & his materialistic mechanical deterministic "newtonian-cartesian " paradigm have been experiencing some dead locks = an understatement , at the level of ...qauntum physics for example

The theory of chaos should be enough to convince you of the fact that materialistic determinism or "theory of everything " is ...a false "idea " ,to mention just that fact

I see that notion of emergent property for example that was trying to explain the existence of the human consciousness as "the theory of everything " for physicists & biologists who have been trying to explain the existence of the extremely rich diversity of life & "dead " matter = organic & un-organic matter , just by that emergent property theory


Even the so-called evolutionary psychology is too simplistic , trying to explain the very existence of our consciousness , emotions, feelings , conscience ,our bad & good sides , the human nature ......& even love .....only in materialistic evolutionary terms = as survival strategies .....pffff...


while the intellect for example , consciousness ....can never be the product of evolution = the product of their own abstract apprehending of reality

Intellect , consciousness, ...can evolve indeed but can never be the product of evolution for example

materialism is really a very simplistic ridiculous , one sided , reductionistic, one dimentional, handicaped , color blind ....view of life ,the world, the universe really

Handicaped in the sense that it approaches life , the world, the universe via one of its dimentions = matter : it's like someone who chooses to walk on one leg or foot while denying the very obvious existence of his / her other healthy leg or foot = this is even just a material example or comparison only that does no honor our immaterial dimention in relation to our material one as viewed by...materialism


Thanks, appreciate , buddy

Good night indeed : nice holidays by the way : all the best


(12-12-2011 07:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-12-2011 03:01 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  
(12-12-2011 01:09 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(12-12-2011 12:20 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Psychology makes part of the human sciences , so it's no exact science , it is really a pseudo-science with no scientific basis for the mst part at least

Neuro-psychology tries to have a scientific basis by relying on the scientific facts of neurology , but it remains a pseudo-science though because the nature & function of the human nature are not something material = immaterial

The nature & function of the immaterial dimention of man = the human spirit , will always be beyond humans ' & beyond science's reach , i guess, despite all the scientific advances in relation to the human consciousness
That is incorrect. Your agenda is getting in the way of your rational information processor. Your will is to credit Allah and discredit science, but you are missing some terms in your polynomial. For instance, science must be the will of Allah, or there wouldn't be no science; and obviously you can know Allah, or you wouldn't be so quick to swing your sledgehammer. And thus the third postulate is falsified.

Ease up there AbdelZ. Watch where you're swinging that thing. Wink

Honest ? i do not know what you are talking about, buddy

Don't worry, many people don't.

However, your argument is totally invalid. You cannot use a religious belief to determine if something is or is not a science. That's just absurd.

I am not talking about the pure descriptive scientific facts no one can deny , i am talking about the prescriptive ideological materialism that's dominating in exact sciences as well as in human sciences, excluding all non-materialistic paradigms in the process, especially those of religions

Well, for your info , the following :

Especially considering the overwhelming evidence concerning the islamic origin of the scientific method , to mention just this fact , = modern science itself as the legetimate natural daughter of islam = the 2 are the 2 sides of the same story = science helping explain some aspects of the sacred & vice versa :

the following :

As the materialistic philosophy of science or the materialistic modern philosophy tout court can feed back science & vice versa, idem dito for hinduism, taoism, buddhism ....so can islam do that like no other & much better

See hiow taoism & buddhism for example are somehow in harmony with quantum physics & how the islamic atomism that was fundamentally different from the old classical Greek one , is in harmony with quantum physics

See how muslims were the first ever to discover evolution itself centuries before Darwin was even born , see how psychiology itself was so developed & humane under the glory time of islam when medieval Europe used to consider the psychologically ill as possessed by the devil & therefore put in dark filthy inhumane cells & in chains
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes AbdelZ's post
13-12-2011, 03:41 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
(13-12-2011 03:24 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  All i am saying is that materialism as an Eurocentric ideology has been dominating in exact sciences = its own level , as well as in human sciences, excluding all non-materialistic paradigms in the process, especially those of religions for obvious ideological reasons , that's why materialism has been succeeding only at the level of the exact sciences = at the level of matter , not really at the level of human sciences for example , simply because materialism rejects the immaterial dimention of man = the most valuable dimention of man = the human spirit whose nature & function are far beyond humans' & far beyond science's reach : so, it's pretty handy for materialism because if materialism would acknowledge or recognize the very existence of the immaterial dimention of man as such , he would be in serious ideological paradoxical trouble haha
Science finds no evidence for an 'immaterial dimension of man', so yes, that is rejected.
If you would like to rationally discuss monism vs dualism, you might try dropping the antagonistic political polemic.

Quote:Even at the level of matter itself , both materialism & his materialistic mechanical deterministic "newtonian-cartesian " paradigm have been experiencing some dead locks = an understatement , at the level of ...qauntum physics for example

The theory of chaos should be enough to convince you of the fact that materialistic determinism or "theory of everything " is ...a false "idea " ,to mention just that fact
Fact? No, your opinion.
Quote:I see that notion of emergent property for example that was trying to explain the existence of the human consciousness as "the theory of everything " for physicists & biologists who have been trying to explain the existence of the extremely rich diversity of life & "dead " matter = organic & un-organic matter , just by that emergent property theory
Consciousness as an emergent property of the brain has nothing to do with the Theory of Everything. The ToE is about unifying physics.
Quote:Even the so-called evolutionary psychology is too simplistic , trying to explain the very existence of our consciousness , emotions, feelings , conscience ,our bad & good sides , the human nature ......& even love .....only in materialistic evolutionary terms = as survival strategies .....pffff...
Again, you dismiss without any evidence. You are arguing from ignorance. Just because you can't imagine how this could be, you attribute consciousness to the spoirit world.
Quote:while the intellect for example , consciousness ....can never be the product of evolution = the product of their own abstract apprehending of reality

Intellect , consciousness, ...can evolve indeed but can never be the product of evolution for example

materialism is really a very simplistic ridiculous , one sided , reductionistic, one dimentional, handicaped , color blind ....view of life ,the world, the universe really

Handicaped in the sense that it approaches life , the world, the universe via one of its dimentions = matter : it's like someone who chooses to walk on one leg or foot while denying the very obvious existence of his / her other healthy leg or foot = this is even just a material example or comparison only that does no honor our immaterial dimention in relation to our material one as viewed by...materialism

There is nothing handicapped about it. You are using opinion and no facts. If you would like to see how consciousness and rational thought could be emergent properties, I suggest you read The Mind's I by Douglas Hofstadter & Daniel C. Dennett.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-12-2011, 03:48 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
(13-12-2011 03:24 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  All i am saying is that materialism as an Eurocentric ideology has been dominating in exact sciences = its own level , as well as in human sciences, excluding all non-materialistic paradigms in the process, especially those of religions for obvious ideological reasons , that's why materialism has been succeeding only at the level of the exact sciences = at the level of matter , not really at the level of human sciences for example , simply because materialism rejects the immaterial dimention of man = the most valuable dimention of man = the human spirit whose nature & function are far beyond humans' & far beyond science's reach : so, it's pretty handy for materialism because if materialism would acknowledge or recognize the very existence of the immaterial dimention of man as such , he would be in serious ideological paradoxical trouble haha

Your premise is that we are failing in the social sciences. I don't think that we are. We are continuously improving and growing and learning. That's not failing- that is success. Failing would be taking a step back: for example, were we to start including supernatural explanations as valid explanations in the physical world, then we would be taking a step back and failing.

(13-12-2011 03:24 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Even the so-called evolutionary psychology is too simplistic , trying to explain the very existence of our consciousness , emotions, feelings , conscience ,our bad & good sides , the human nature ......& even love .....only in materialistic evolutionary terms = as survival strategies .....pffff...

Since you're haughtily dismissing it, explain why evolutionary psychology is too simplistic.

(13-12-2011 03:24 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  while the intellect for example , consciousness ....can never be the product of evolution = the product of their own abstract apprehending of reality

Intellect , consciousness, ...can evolve indeed but can never be the product of evolution for example

But intellect and consciousness did evolve. I see no other suitable explanation for the existence of this discussion.

(13-12-2011 03:24 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Handicaped in the sense that it approaches life , the world, the universe via one of its dimentions = matter : it's like someone who chooses to walk on one leg or foot while denying the very obvious existence of his / her other healthy leg or foot = this is even just a material example or comparison only that does no honor our immaterial dimention in relation to our material one as viewed by...materialism

Your spare leg doesn't exist, but feel free to keep telling us it does. I've yet to see anyone actually walk on an invisible leg, maybe you'll be the first. Rolleyes

Like it or not, you're walking on the same two legs everyone else has, but you're proclaiming one of yours is supernatural without any actual evidence.

(13-12-2011 03:24 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  Good night indeed : nice holidays by the way : all the best

Have a great holiday season as well! Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-12-2011, 03:50 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
I talked about the theory of everything as a metaphor concerning the emergent property= biologists & physicists try to explain almost everything by the notion of emergent property , later , gotta go, thanks : try to understand the rest of my words too , do not twist them , please , appreciate

How can materialism say that life is all about material processes ? because it cannot measure or approach the immaterial dimention of man empirically ? haha , silly really

What cannot be approached empirically does not mean it does not exist

I know enough of Dennet , Dawkins & co, do not worry = they have too simplistic reductionistic , one sided , one dimentional .....handicaped , color blind materialistic evolutionary views

later more , Good night
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes AbdelZ's post
13-12-2011, 03:58 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
Ugh... hit "like" instead of reply... suddenly I'm not sure I like the new placement of that button. Maybe I just need to get used to it.

(13-12-2011 03:50 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  I know enough of Dennet , Dawkins & co, do not worry = they have too simplistic reductionistic , one sided , one dimentional .....handicaped , color blind materialistic evolutionary views

later more , Good night

You can handily dismiss Dennet, Dawkins, "and co" (who is "and co", I wasn't aware that all scientists could be grouped together and referred to as "and co"). Does that mean we can dismiss Iqbal and co?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-12-2011, 06:09 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
Just chiming in, it may not be "hard science" but at least they are asking questions. They set up experiments, gather and attempt to analyze data. More than religion can say. The big problem is when you are observing complex animals like humans, they can lie or deliberately behave in a way contrary to how they would if you weren't gathering data. Either they are being smart asses or doing what they think you want them to do rather than what they would normally do.

Pavlov did some fascinating work with conditioned response and the reason I believe we can trust his observations, his test subjects didn't know how to lie. It was pure animal behavior at its essence. You can see things happen to humans at a reflexive level. Ring a bell then turn off the light 3 times while watching someone's pupil. The 4th time ring the bell but don't turn off the light and you will see the pupil dilate for an instant then correct itself.

I would say the basic wiring can be tested scientifically but anything on top of that is the opinion of the researcher. Probably gathered from, them, inventorying their own development/behavior or they are pre-sold on the theories of some researcher that came before. They plop all of human development/behavior into pre-defined categories then when someone doesn't fit that mold they call it "atypical/pathological" and ignore what might be a real part of that particular human's nature.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-12-2011, 06:12 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
(13-12-2011 03:24 PM)AbdelZ Wrote:  materialism is really a very simplistic ridiculous , one sided , reductionistic, one dimentional, handicaped , color blind ....view of life ,the world, the universe really
Absolutely. Reality's entropic; but what science provides is an ever evolving methodology that continues to converge to an ever-changing baseline.

Psychology began like all science, with philosophy; then it veered from the common house of metaphysics with a thread through alchemy and astrology, and while there are more than a few psychologists not much better than Tarot card readers, the methodology is sound. It is science; but remember, science ain't about "what is true," science is about "what works."

And now, rather than "demon possession," many forms of insanity are known for the chemical imbalances they are. Everybody can find value in a therapy session or two - because we are just chemicals - but science can only ever take one 98% of the way. After everything is known in reality, what is left is the self; and the self must be known on its own terms. We're not image of one god, we're image of 5.13 x 10^61 gods.

All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again. All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing. The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

Ecclesiastes 1:6-9

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2011, 04:09 PM
RE: is Psychology science ?
Materialism as an Eurocentric prescriptive interpretative speculative ideology has nothing to do neither with the material nature of science nor with the material nature of the scientific method



So, do not confuse the prescriptive materialism with the descriptive material science

Worse : materialism has imposed its own prescriptive interpretative speculative view to science like the "fact " that life is just a matter of "material processes " : the latter view is materialistic of nature & has thus nothing to do with science ,idem ditto for those materialistic monistic a-moral ethics that can be traced all the way back to Spinoza's ethics or monism ...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: