/sci/ - Science & Math

Weak Troll. Darwin is one of the most important figures in science to this day.

COMIC SAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>3177395
lol wut?

>"That bird looks like this one"
>"Weak things die"
>me great scientist!

Everything that is not Physics.

Mathematics is just a more abstract branch of theoretical Physics, by the way.

>>3177388

Once again, Einstein's importance is overstated.

I would say Maxwell is to thank for 90% of our technology today.

>>3177388

> math
> manipulate nature
> sage

>>3177410

>math
>branch of physics

>>3177412
>math
>didn't come before physics
>sage

>>3177388
the comic sans is a nice touch

Biology clearly isn't useless. Basically everyone living in the modern world other than freaky hippy communes who condemn modern medecine has benefited from the progress of biology.


Psychology hasn't done anything, and is not likely to ever do anything. Biologists and computer scientists working on AI are will be the ones to make breakthroughs in how the human mind works and psychologists will probably be ther saying " uh we did that. They wouldn't have done any of that without us, really. It's not like we're an anachronistic, useless, speculative field with no practical worth other than what neurobiology we learn from biologists working on brains and nerves".

>>3177520
I don't care if psychology is useless as long as people pay me for being useless and then feel better

>>3177451
>>3177438

wut?

Physics and math have been the same goddamn thing for like eternity.
At some time, math got too big of a topic in physics, so that it got its own branch. The fact that it is more pure doesn't mean it's superior or has been there before or whatever you incorrectly think.

I hate Engineering because it's so useless.

Maron.

Math=/= science.
Physics= science.
Biology= science.
Psychology=/= science.

>>3177411
You mean Gauss, Ampere and Faraday?

>>3177536
Are you an idiot?
Physics=study of nature/reality
Math= study of abstract concepts that some of it might not correspond to reality at all.

>>3177543

And your point is?

Math was a branch of physics. Deal with it.

>>3177538

its moron, you fucking moron

>>3177553
The point is that science is necessarily based in reality, and maths need not have anything to do with reality whatsoever.

Maths: Make up your own axioms, logically derive results.
physics: observe universe, create models of universe that agree with data and can be used to predict its nature.

Maths was never a branch of physics. If anything, it was a branch of philosophy. And if you want to get really aspie about it, physicsi started off as a branch of philosophy as well, in the form of natural philosophy. Except to it's tenuous to even call that physics because it was just a bunch of greek guys randomly assuming that teh ground was made up of tiny cubes and the air was made up of tiny tetrahedrons or whatever, so physics didn't really exist until people started doing experiments to test their models and find things out. And even then physics didn't exist as it did today until the scientific method was formalised.

So maths actually predated physics.

>>3177605

> Maths: Make up your own axioms, logically derive results.

That's logic.

> Maths was never a branch of physics.

Moron detected. Not reading the rest of your post as it is probably as idiotic as this statement.

lolt heartily

thanks OP

Computer $cience because I'm in it.

>>3177611
actual math aspie here.

Are you livin in a cave?
Math was never and it is not a branch of physics.

Also thats not logic, thats rationalizing.

Also, ask your physics and math teachers phds, nobel winners, your slut granny, everyone understands that math is not a branch of physics, except your sorry ass.

Please, get out of /sci/ , clearly you lack the knowledge and intelligence to talk about these matters.

>>3177611
>hurr I'm going to ignore the part of your post that refutes what I'm saying because then I'd be forced to admit that I'm a fucking retard who was wrong. LOL I trol u epic trolling for the w1n xDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!11

>>3177625

> Are you livin in a cave?
> Math was never and it is not a branch of physics.

People observed nature. They THEN observed they could count. They THEN deduced facts about nature using these numbers. They THEN started to anylize mechanical systems and similar stuff.
They THEN started to see that the analysis of such systems does not require an actual real object. They THEN saw that one could do this as theoretical physics. They THEN saw that it was too much work to learn all this in a physics course. They THEN decided to name it math and declare it another branch.

Fucking idiots knowing nothing about history.

>>3177625

He actually just said that math _started_ as a branch of physics.

Yeah, you're definitely and aspie.

>>3177643

> implying you refuted anything

I actually read it afterwards our of boredom and all you said was "you're wrong i'm right lol".

Fuck you.

I hate Physics with a passion due to the people that study it.

>>3177644
Cavemen counting things weren't physicists you fucking moron.
>They THEN deduced facts about nature using these numbers. They THEN started to anylize mechanical systems and similar stuff.

By the time anyone started analysing mechanical systems quantitatively maths had already been studied as a proper subject for hundreds and hundreds of years.
You clearly are under some staggering misconsceptions about what science is. I humbly suggest you get the fuck off 4chan and open a highschool science textbook. Most of them will have a few pages towards the beginning of the book titled something along hte lines of "what science is", which should help diminish your ignorance.

>>3177667

> Cavemen counting things weren't physicists you fucking moron.

You just said physics was observing nature.

I do know what science is. Do you know what logical fallacies are? You are using more than one right now.

PhD in physics here, by the way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics

> mathematics evolved from counting, calculation, measurement, and the systematic study of the shapes and motions of physical objects
> The evolution of mathematics might be seen as an ever-increasing series of abstractions, or alternatively an expansion of subject matter. The first abstraction, which is shared by many animals,[11] was probably that of numbers: the realization that a collection of two apples and a collection of two oranges (for example) have something in common, namely quantity of their members.

Need more, moran?

>>3177662
But...I study physics

>>3177667

Noticing that all things fall down if you let them is a physical observation that has surely been made before numbers had been thought of.

>>3177649
>denying that the greeks studied maths
>denying that the greeks studied natural philosophy rather than science
>denying that natural philosophy was was not science at all because rather than testing testing every hypotheses by experiment, natural philosophers would often just accept ridiculous assumptions like "earth and metal is made of tiny, identical cubes" because it was beautiful

but that's wrong you fucking retard. Physics did not exist in the time of ancient greece. maths, however did.

That alone refutes your argument, you ignorant fucking retard.

psychologists, because they denounced introspection when that is seriously the only way to REALLY get results in psychology. All other methods are just tricks to induce introspection.

>>3177688
>Physics did not exist in the time of ancient greece.

>>3177682
>You just said physics was observing nature.
That was a reductive statement because a precise definition would likely have bored or confused you.

Observing nature is necessary but not sufficient for physics (N.B. as opposed to maths). If you really had a PhD in physics I shouldn't need to explain this to you because you should know what physics, science, and the scientific method are.

>>3177388
Biology is important in applying chemistry, until you can cure cancer using something from the LHC (bad example, but deal with it) biology will be a necessary bridge between chemistry and medicine. Psychology, as stated in my previous post, is more an art than a science, or at least non-pharmaceutical psychology is.

>>3177688

[citation needed]

> denying that the greeks studied maths

I did NOT say that

> >denying that the greeks studied natural philosophy rather than science

I did NOT say that

> Physics did not exist in the time of ancient greece

lololol

y u switching definitions of math and physics?

Oh i know why, cause you're a retard.

>>3177702

lrn2discuss

>>3177581

>>3177699
It didn't you ignorant dipshit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_element#Classical_elements_in_Greece
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_(classical_element)
>Timaeus, Plato's major cosmological dialogue, the Platonic solid he associated with fire was the tetrahedron which is formed from four triangles and contains the least volume with the greatest surface area.
> This also makes fire the element with the smallest number of sides, and Plato regarded it as appropriate for the heat of fire, which he felt is sharp and stabbing, (like one of the points of a tetrahedra).
This is what was believed in acadmic communities in ancient Greece. It wasn't tested scientifically tested by experiment as would be required for it to qualify as physics.
To call it science would be to call homeopathy science.


Maths however, emphatically did exist in Ancient Greece. I hope you aren't so desperate to avoid getting told that you'd deny that.

>>3177710
>get told
>reply with glib, meaningless response

Are we done here?

>>3177612

this picture is amazing

>>3177748

And? They also believed the earth was flat and it was truth by that time.

You truly are an aspie and need to learn how to put yourself in the position of someone else.

>>3177748
>science did not exist before the modern scientific method was developed

Cool story, bro. I hope you realize how retarded you sound.

>>3177754

getting told is something different than saying "oh when i said that i assumed", then some ad hominem.

If yomeone in here got told, it is you.

>>3177748

Now you're just making me laugh.

Depends in what context you mean. I found history as boring as shit at school, just recounting without a scrap of analysis, although history as a field doesn't seem to have that problem.

I hate economics since it is pretty much all of the worst facts of life composed into a field, lol.

>>3177707
You implied both those things by saying that what I wrote in >>3177605 didn't refute your argument. The only way what I wrote didn't refute your argument would be if teh greeks didn't study maths, and studied physics rather than natural philosophy, so that was what you were implying. Neither of which are true. GG retard.

>implying physics existed in ancient greece
see >>3177748

>y u switching definitions of math and physics?
I never did that. Why are you acting as though I did? Oh right because your retarded argument has been beaten and you're trying to weasel out of getting embarrassingly told.

>>3177777
An entire post about semantics with zero content. What a waste of a quints, /sci/

>>3177779
agree'd

>>3177777

That's not true at all. I said math started as a branch of science and explained how, then you said "no , lol, that is not true because math according to the current definition that i use in this post is not a branch of physics".

>>3177777

see >>3177543
>Physics=study of nature/reality
>Math= study of abstract concepts that some of it might not correspond to reality at all.

then >>3177605
>Maths: Make up your own axioms, logically derive results.
>physics: observe universe, create models of universe that agree with data and can be used to predict its nature

and >>3177667


and so on. Not even caring enough to point out more.

>>3177757
Believeing the earth was flat agreed with observation that if you stand on the surface of a very large, nearly spherical object with radius much larger than your own height, and much larger than teh distance which can be seen, then you appear to be standing on a flat surface. I.E. it was a result which was tested and agreed with evidence.

Assuming that water , earth, fire and air are the four elements of whch all matter is made, and that earth was made out of tiny cubes and water out of tiny icosahedrons just because is not scientific whatsoever. And this was what was commonly accepted within the academic community. If physics existed in those days, then this unsubstantiated, unsupported theory of the elemetns would hold just as much weight as me suddenly blurting out "Light travels 3x10^8 m/s because the collision between two universes which caused the bigbang that created our universe involved two universes collliding with each other and the relative speed with which their centres of mass were moving toward each other was roughly 3*10^8 m/s".

So we can quite obviously see that physics, as a subject did not exist back in ancient greece. Maths however did. So maths clearly predates physics.

>>3177817
>physics did not exist because it didn't exist in its current incarnation

Civilization didn't exist in ancient Greece because they didn't have electricity the Internet.

What now?

>>3177817

> it was a result which was tested and agreed with evidence
> then you appear to be standing on a flat surface
> you appear

Nice scientific evidence you got there (it must be true because that's what i see). Switching definitions again?
Same argument of yourse applies for the elements/fire theory by the way.

Why are you so stubborn about this single case/the greek? There were other cultures at that time, you know?

>>3177805
>quouting things I said that are correct and demonstrate how maths did not arise from physics

I have no idea what you think you're proving other than the fact I'm correct.

>>3177830
lolstrawman

>>3177842

Just showing you where you switched definitions, as an example. There were more, but i'm way too lazy.

Tehy do actually prove you prone to logical fallacies, whcih you are a victim of here.

Your only argument is that math, as it is now, is, in present, not seen as a part of mathematics and you conclude that therefore this has always been the case, which is plain wrong.

>>3177846

> implying that wasn't planned to show that the person he referenced did that as well

>>3177830
Electricity and the internet aren't an integral and necessary part of civilisation. Testing hypotheses and not just accepting arbitrary assumptions about the nature of reality and the universe are necessary and integral parts of sciences and physics. The greek academic community didn't mind however because they did not study science and physics, instead they studied natural philosophy.

However they did study maths, which in no uncertain terms proves that maths was never a " branch of physics" and actually predated physics.

>>3177853
No, my argument is that people studied maths before theys studied physics, so maths could never have been a branch of physics.

>>3177869
>Electricity and the internet aren't an integral and necessary part of civilisation.

Because you say so.

>Testing hypotheses and not just accepting arbitrary assumptions about the nature of reality and the universe are necessary and integral parts of sciences and physics.

Because you say so.

Natural philosophy IS science.

>>3177876

Based on what evidence do you claim they studied math before physics?

I showed my reasoning, provided source and explained.

What came from you? Nothing more than "No you're wrong, math predated physics because our understanding of what maths and physics are right now must have been true for every time".

Truth is, people wondered about how nature worked. They then started with philosophy, which branched off into physics and philosophy. Physics then broke off into "pure" physics and pure math (philosophy into some branches as well, but that's not interesting).

>>3177878
>Natural philosophy IS science.

Wittgenstein:
4.111 Philosophy is not one of the natural sciences.
(The word “philosophy” must mean something whose place is above or below the natural sciences, not beside them.)

4.1122 Darwin’s theory has no more to do with philosophy than any other hypothesis in natural science.

>>3177876
Even geometry, the most ancient and simple form of math, started from the study of the shape of physical objects, because they were needed in architecture, astronomy and setting up fields for farming.

>>3177900

switching definitions again?

science != natural science

>>3177878
>Because you say so.
No because, because a collection of people who decided on the definition of "civilisation" said so.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/civilisation
>because you say so
No, because a collection of people who decided what the necesary procedure for sciences is said so
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Natural philosophy IS science.
Natural philosophy, as it existed in ancient greece (as opposed ot later) was not science, because natural philosophy did not need to follow the scientific method, hence why it was accepted that fire was made out of tiny tetrahedrons.

>>3177388

>Einstein
>Physics

pick one

>>3177913
not him

> people who decided what the necesary procedure for sciences is said so

After physics/math/other sciences had been performed for millenia.

That's why i brought up the example of the flat earth. Things change. You still don't get that and apply the current definition to what the greek did.
Not possible.

>>3177913
Look, you fucking moron, you are applying modern definitions to a time before they even existed. Everything you say is pure, unadulterated bullshit.

>>3177904
Let's say that's true, you assume that because greek mathematicians and philosophers only thought about shapes that existed in the real world, that physics existed back in those days. This is wrong. physics did not exist, only natural philosophy.

However they did study maths in the exactly the same way we do. By assuming something, in the case of geometry, the euclidean axioms that their geometric space resided within a 2d/3d, non-curved grid, and then derived results from it using logic.
By contrast, the investigations they did into the physical universe did not constitute physics. they included things like " I think the earth is made out of cubes. I will not perfrom any experiments to verify this hypothesis, but it seems to make sense to me taht they would be cubes." "Yes. Agreed. The earth is made out of tiny cubes". If physics existed this would not be what was accepted inteh greek academic community, but glib, unsubstantiated asumptions about the universe such as these were accepted as fact because physics did not exist at teh time, only natural philosophy.

implying einstein would have lived to do anything were it not for biologists who did little things like cure small pox, triple life expectancy, decrease infant mortality, increase food production.

what fucking good has einsteins theory of relativity really done?

i mean it gives us a better understanding of space and time and perhaps was needed for our current space flights but what actual noticeable effect has einsteins theory of relativity had on our civilization?

>>3177954

> I think the earth is made out of cubes

I'll use this assumption to deduce some facts which i will hopefully be able to test soon. Oh, technology is not developed enough yet? Too bad, that must have also happened before they built the LHC to look for the Higgs. Until they built it, the higgs particle was surely not physics, but natural philosophy.

> still falling for same logical fallacies

>>3177966

> what fucking good has einsteins theory of relativity really done?

lol

Computers, GPS, satellites and spacecrafts in general, modern communication, fundamental understanding of the universe, including explanation for various phenomena we observe and would be frightened of if it had no explanation

Einstein also explained Brownian motion, started quantum mechanics, explained why the right side of rivers going from north to south shows more erosion, developed a refridgerating system, can't even think of a field he did not have his head in.

>>3177931
What an absurd objection. People can't use terms/concepts to refer/describe to things before the terms/concepts were invented?
I guess taht means that all experiments on electricty before 1838 weren't iinvestigating phenomena due to teh movement of electrons.

>>3177982
>equating assuming the earth is made out of cubes because the idea of cubes appeals to you to modelling the existance of a higgs boson based on the fact it would resolve and account for symmetry properties that have been in observed in real subatomic experiments

Nice try, kiddo. Modern theoretical physics provides models that would account for real physical and amthematical qualities that have been observed and recorded.
Assuming that matter is made out of particualr geometric shapes for aesthetic reasons is not the same thing whatsoever.

>>3177992
>>3177992
>>3177992
computers? what, how has the theory of relativity enabled computers?

the only benefit to the theory of relativity is that gps is more accurate having an error of 1 m instead of 10.

as for communications through satelites again that may be true but lets face it mobile phones and satelite communications are so prevalent and so essential because we built systems that rely on them and it is not really necessary.

>>3177993
You just turned your point around, you fucking moron. From your point of view, it wasn't electricity because they didn't know it was electrons.

>>3178029
How so? You're the one objecting to useing a term after to refer to something ifthe term came into use after that thing happned, not me.
>you fucking moron, you are applying modern definitions to a time before they even existed

Trying to change your argument after you've realised how retarded it is, huh? Really subtle.

>>3178040
You really are a demented idiot, the modern definition of electricity is that it is a motion of electrons. Therefore, by applying that, what they were studying was not electricity, because they didn't consider it to be the motion of electrons.

That's exactly how your point is like. Because you are retarded.

>>3178017

> implying there's a difference

moron.

There is stuff you can't explain, you make an assumption, just like he did.

>>3177954
If Elements were published today, we would toss it out and say "lol, nice assumptions and vague definitions bro". So I guess Euclid didn't do maths.

>>3178051
>because they didn't consider it to be the motion of electrons
>because they didn't consider

So what they consider somehow supercedes what they were actaully investigating?
So If I fed flies food mixed with LSD, as long as I considered that I was feeding LSD to humans, then I would actually be investigating the afects of LSD on humans?

Nice logical fallacy, kiddo

>>3178078
That's not true, Euclidean geometry has been basically completely unchanged throughout hte history of mathematics.

>>3178096

You don't see what he did, you don't see what you did. What you are doing in this discussion is exactly what he is doing, trying to show you how stupid it is, what you do.

It won't work apparently because you just close your eyes in front of all the evidence/arguments posted here.

>>3178106

Did you read the elements?

>>3178106
In the same way Newton's law's still work for a lot of things, but it's not what we would say is good mathematics today.
Take his construction of an equilateral triangle for example, he never proves that the circles will actually meet, it's a completely unfounded assumptions that's never stated anywhere.

>>3178069
>you really can't see the difference between assuming somethign as fact for no other reason than because the idea appeals to you and presenting a hypothesis that accounts for several unnaccounted for, physical and mathematical properties and so resolves several theroies and models which all have empirical evidence backing them up?
I don't think you have even the faintest idea what modern theoretical physics is. I think you're under the impression that it's just mathematicians making shit that has nothing to do with anything else in physics for no reason. Please educate yourself.

Furthermore, Higgsboson isn't assumed to exist. It's a hypothetical particle. On the other hand fire tetrahedrons and water icosahedrons and what have you were assumed to exist with no evidence whatsoever.

If the greeks had studied physics they'd say "it may be that there are 4 elements, and they are based on geometric shapes, but there is no evidence for this that we can rpovide at the moment so it is just a baseless hypothesis, furthermore, it doesn't agree mathetmatically with any other laws or models currently in our possession."

>>3178113
>You don't see what he did, you don't see what you did. What you are doing in this discussion is exactly what he is doing, trying to show you how stupid it is, what you do.

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

>It won't work apparently because you just close your eyes in front of all the evidence/arguments posted here.

I close my eyes? That's rich coming from someone refusing to accept that the greeks didn't study sicnece or physics but natural philosophy, whereas they did study maths.
see >>3177913
>>3177748

>>3178141

> for no other reason than because the idea appeals to yo

That's what YOU say. He did have reason.

I AM a theoretical physicist, as stated before, i work on deriving a boundary for the graviton mass through fixed point quantum gravity.

> Higgsboson isn't assumed to exist. It's a hypothetical particle

lolwut?

We assume it exists and look wether it can explain the data. It is hypothetical until it is found. We also assume a lot of other things to account for the data.

> Please educate yourself.

NO U

Discussing with you is pointless. I'm out

>>3178183

Please stop fapping over the greeks, we don't care how gay you are.

By that time, the performed physics. Several people in here provided good evidence, arguments and sources for that claim.

Still, you only come up with "the fact they didn't do it as physics is defined now, but they did math as it was defined then, not today".

>>3178187

Is right, this is pointless. Troll elsewhere.

>>3178187
His "reasons " are as unscientific as "the tetrahedron is the regular polyhedron with the sharpest corners, and fire feels sharp when you touch it" And that doesn;t even begin to explain why he'd assume that the four elements (another asumption) would need to be composed of regular polyhedra.

Comparing this to the Qulaities of Quantum field theory and gauge theory that a higgs boson would account for, it's clear that the higgs boson was a hpothetical idea that has scientific justification behind it while ancient greek natural philosophy was just baseless aesthetic bullshit.

>We assume it exists and look wether it can explain the data
but our understanding isn't "higgs bosons exist" in the same way we understand electrons to exist. It's a hypothetical particle. Ancinet greeks on the toher hand believed that earth cubes and fire tetrahedrons existed as much a stick of wood exists, because they did not do physics, they did natural philosophy which does not require that assertions be tested by experiment in order to be accepted.

Psychology:

Lets lobotomize and electroshock people as form of treatment.

>>3178197
>By that time, the performed physics

what a nice, vague, nebulous term you've used. "performed". I suppose you mean that they took part in physical phenonmena like burning things or something.

But that's irrelevent because the fact of the matter is they did not study physics. The only "study" of hte unioverse they did was natural philosophy. This is simply historical fact. If you dispute this, then you do not know shit about greek culture and are trying to rewrite history in order to try and support the retarded idea that maths was a branch of physics.

Biology is useless?
Tell that your doctor

>Psychology hasn't done anything, and is not likely to ever do anything

You sir, clearly do not understand the implications of psychology beyond that of Freud and Pavlov.

There are many specific fields such as clinical and neuropsych to name two. Then you also have research psych, marketing psych, etc. The only field that I can think of atm which is a bit fluffy is sports-psych and that's simply because I envisage the psych acting as a coach.

Now, clinical psych has massive implications. Psychological aid can be provided to virtually anyone of any age. Issues range from developmental disorders, depression etc to schizophrenia and things such as dissociative and borderline personality disorder.

What's messed up about the latter? Dissociative PD - multiple personalities, some cases have over 100 distinct personalities. Try integrating all of them. Why did it occur? Majority of them were raped as a child.

Borderline PD? Imagine someone who's highly neurotic, enamored one day, hates you the next. Self-harm, including suicidal acts to gain your attention. Will stop at nothing. Their lives and their minds are a mess. Highly dependent. Can ruin psychologists career. Intense.

Clinical psychology serves to assist people with the aforementioned conditions and about a million more re-establish control of their lives and become functional members of society. So I really do not see where you're coming from when you say something such as:

>Psychology hasn't done anything, and is not likely to ever do anything

>>3178241
Still done. Very rarely and in extreme cases. ECT is very effective in treating depression which is treatment resistant (ie. no drugs whatsoever help, no form of psychotherapy helps, nothing helps, their life is shit, think about suicide all day evey day, interpersonal and occupational life is terrible.) Lobotomies are also performed but afaik only in those with extreme epilepsy. Aids in limiting the severity of symptoms

>>3178241
There are (were) people who spent every waking moment violently trying to damage everything and everyone around them including themselves.
Damaging or removing a piece of grey matter that is destroying the entire organism is like removing a cancer.

>>3178287
implying healthy, 'sane' people care about the sick kiddoes. Other than that, I doubt any of us needed psychology to confirm that raping children wasn't good for them.
Markety psychology is so useless compared to superior technologies. Without the technologies REAL sciences got onto the market, you'd have nothing new to sell, and no way to express your marketing.

>>3178328
No, intuition tells most that raping/abusing someone isn't healthy for the victim but it doesn't tell you what to do after the damage has been done.

Now in regard to 'sane' people, and I'm assuming that you're referring to gen pop, as simply not caring about those with issues is just profoundly retarded.

>>3178287
Clinical psychology is a corrupt fucking frace with teh sole purpose of categorising every conceivable human behaviour and labelliing it as a mental illness, and then consequently convincing people that they ned to buy psychoactive drugs from drug companies to medicate themselves.

According to the DSM, "siblin rivalry", "phase of life disorder", "spelling disorder"and "arithmetic disorder" are mental illnesses. Clinical psychology is also the reason children, fucking children for gods sake are beign medicated with so many antidepressants and drugs for ADD and other "personality disorders".
Do you have any idea how CNS receptor pharmacology works? Do they bother to teach you that in psychology? When someone takes antidepressants for more than a short period of time, th receptors get overstimulated as a result of the drugs effectively increasing the signal. This will lead to receptors getting endocytosed as negative feed back to reduce the overstimulated response, so when people try to come off antidepressants, tehy feel even more miserable than they did before. In adults it's bad enough, but at least they should know to look after their own bodies, but recommending antidepressants to fucking children?

Your discipline is a corrupt, spectacularly harmful farce.

>>3178366
This will be fun.

Clinical psychology is not responsible for any medication. clinical psychologists did not study medicine. Your doc or psychiatrist do that

I don't agree with labeling if the psychologist is unable to treat it. Even then, it still carries a stigma but unfortunately there's not a better way at the given moment.

They're not mental illnesses, they're disorders whether developmental in origin or what have you. They're merely there as a guide. I also agree that the diagnostic criteria are at times difficult but they exist for good reason which is to formally identify what is wrong.
Ritalin is not prescribed by psychologists. I do however know that rits 'kiddy speed' only reduce the hyperactivity. Clinical psych helps kids manage and learn how they can pay attention, and get along with their peers at school. It's about management

Yes, but did you also know that A-D's are primarily used when the person is unable to function properly at the beginning of treatment and that at the end they are capable of functioning well without them? Did you also know that you must wean off them? Did you also know that they can produce positive structural changes in the brain?

Your post seemed like an attack. We don't medicate. We help people and often help people help themselves, or at least try and make it appear that way.

>>3178327

yea, we should do that to all criminals.

(asshat)

Soon, they'll tell us to be smarter or dumber so everyone gets equal chances...
Psychology can do its best at making a minority of the miserable people feel better, and may have huge successes in those fields.
The other sciences mentioned have had huge effects on EVERYONE their lives, no questions asked.
And labeling nearly everyone doesn't change that <;

[Field] Education

I don't know why someone who plans on teaching [Field] should be allowed to take a lite version of their major along with a few education courses.

>>3177703
>Biology is important in applying chemistry, until you can cure cancer using something from the LHC (bad example, but deal with it) biology will be a necessary bridge between chemistry and medicine.
Well, actually you can cure braincancer by using anti-matter-radiation from the LHC - good bye, biology!

http://www.slideshare.net/ssakpi/study-of-the-antimatter-at-large-hadron-collider
point 83.

>>3178476
Yes because there are no other fields other than clinical psychology. There are no other implications. All evidence for psychology is stamped with a rainbow so that laymen are able to recognise its implications without looking for it or doing some light reseach.

>Math= study of abstract concepts that some of it might not correspond to reality at all.

>implying pure mathematics exist

Regardless of how hard mathematicians try, there is no mathematics that isn't applicable to the world.

Psychology

Fucking pseudoscience bullshit. Should be fucking banned.

>Biology
>useless

Got to be trolling.

>>3178484
because you live in a shitty country

>implying einstein would have lived to do anything were it not for biologists who did little things like cure small pox, triple life expectancy, decrease infant mortality, increase food production.

Do you know when he lived and when medicine did those things?

>That's not true, Euclidean geometry has been basically completely unchanged throughout the history of mathematics.

except in America where they stop teaching real geometry about a 100 years ago...

Biology is filled with the most sexists, racists, and people who think IQ is a good measure of intelligence.
also filled people who are secretly gnostic-atheists which makes them fail at logic even more.

>>3181393
>>3181393

>calls all biologists sexist and racists
>doesnt see the irony in that

MATH IS NOT PART OF PHYSICS YOU FUCKING FAGGOT

PURE MATH IS MORE LIKE A PART OF LOGIC WHICH IS A PART OF PHILOSOPHY

PHYSICS IS PART OF APPLIED MATH, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.