/sci/ - Science & Math

Because it doesn't involve muh numbers.

>>5751848
Of course not. The epic levels of retardation in psychology would take far longer than 10 seconds to point out.

>>5751853
Take your time and do it. I'm waiting.

>>5751853
Or maybe you mathfags just can't point it out at all.

Because it's wrong.

>>5751858
What makes you think he's a mathfag? Most likely he knows less math than psychologists.

>>5751867
Because he's clearly implying Psychology is retarded, and it's a common stance among mathfags.

>>5751868
>it's a common stance among mathfags.

No, it isn't. It's only a common stance among pseudo-intellectual high schoolers.

>>5751875
Psychology IS retarded, though. And saying it isn't because some "pseudo-intellectual high schoolers" agree is an ad hominem.

>>5751878
Burden of proof is on you. I asked you to point out where it is "retarded".

>>5751848
Psychologists.

>>5751848
I can't because psychology is a science. It follows the scientific method to analyse mental functions and behaviours.

>>5751882
see
>>5751864

I'd say being wrong is pretty retarded. I usually like to be right more than wrong. That's just me though.

>>5751897
Why is it wrong?

>>5751884
To be more clear, I mean that the psychologists I have met are disproportionately fucking stupid. I deem this statistically significant, so I class Psychology as shit-tier. Same goes for Media, Theatre Studies, Sociology...
I don't have the time to waste looking at it in great detail, so this will have to do.

>>5751900
It tries to categorize people by labels such as "autism" "psychopath" or "schizophrenia" even though all are just mental states that can be achieved by anyone. You could be diagnosed to have any mental disorder simply by doing the appropriate drugs before being diagnosed.
Lastly, I was examined by an official psychological test (I asked about its validity and I was told it's used everywhere in multiple countries and it's definitely credible). According to it, I have poor logical reasoning skills, yet my IQ is 118. How does that make any sense?

>>5751937
>It tries to categorize people by labels such as "autism" "psychopath" or "schizophrenia"
"Autism" and "psychopath" are not psychological terminology. They are only used by uneducated laymen. They are not official diagnoses.

>You could be diagnosed to have any mental disorder simply by doing the appropriate drugs before being diagnosed.
Drug abuse certainly makes you mentally ill.

>According to it, I have poor logical reasoning skills, yet my IQ is 118. How does that make any sense?
Sounds accurate. You are talking like a retard and your reasoning skills are underdeveloped. You refuse to educate yourself on the topic and instead you insist in your emotional bias even after it has been refuted by facts.

>>5751948
Yeah, I'm retarded. So, how come I have an IQ of 118 which is "high intelligence"? Do retards have high intelligence?

>>5751954
>>5751948
And to clarify, the poor logic skills and the 118 IQ were given by the SAME TEST. I did not take some test online.

>>5751954
How is it "high intelligence"? You are above average but that doesn't mean anything, considering that the "average" person cannot formulate a coherent sentence. In the academic context you are plain retarded. Anything lower than 140 is considered retarded in academia.

>>5751960
I can confirm your poor logic skills.

>>5751964
>In the academic context you are plain retarded
I am not in academic context.
>You are above average but that doesn't mean anything,
IQ doesn't mean anything -> psychology doesn't mean anything

>>5751976
>I am not in academic context.

Obviously. That's why you're so uneducated. What are you even doing on a science board?

>>5751984
To see how long I can pretend I'm smart before people realize I'm stupid.
Usually they realize it pretty quickly.

Nobody can explain why psychology is wrong. Are you even trying, scifags?

>>5751937
You sound like a tard. Seriously. Also waaah Psychology says I´m stupid so I hate it now.

psychology student doing 7th phd reporting in

willing to admit its not as robust has the pure sciences

the pure sciences aren't as robust as they could be, ergo science exists as a continnum. psychology is further away from the 1 value than say chemistry, but still a science.

Ignore the popular psychology and look into the neuroscience, single neuronal manipulation .
observable effects.

Not pure, but useful, and will eventually yield the answers to all that there is. you, your subjective phenomenological experience.

immortality, uploading consciousness to non biological matter.

What more do you ask?

>>5752004
No, it says I'm intelligent (IQ=118) even though I'm clearly not.

>>5752011
Average IQ of Japan = 105
I can't be smarter than the average Japanese person.
That's why it's bullshit.

>>5752009
Stop lying. You are clearly not a PhD and apparently youd don't know shit about psychology. You don't even understand the scientific method.

>>5752011
It says you're unintelligent.

>>5752009
>psychology student doing 7th phd reporting in

>>5752014

>>5751964
TIL Feynman was retarded.

IQ is not a substitute for actual achievement in correlating to any definition of intelligence which seems reasonable to me. It isn't clever or nice to alienate over 99% of the population by calling them stupid or claiming that science is not for them.

While you are correct that it is just *pathetic* to brag about an IQ of 118 on a science board for adults, that does not justify elitism.

Sincerely, someone who got a BSc of physics with honours at the age of 19 / bronze medalist in the International Biology Olympiad 2009 / IQ of 161 (not that any of that matters once we move on from scholarship to academia).

>>5752028
>TIL Feynman was retarded.
Yes. Feynman was clinically retarded. The more astounding it is that he managed to be a good physicist.

>IQ is not a substitute for actual achievement
Nobody claimed it was.

>in correlating to any definition of intelligence
IQ is the definition of intelligence.

>which seems reasonable to me.
Your emotional opinions are irrelevant to science.

>a BSc of physics
top lel

because it uses the scientific method

/thread

>>5752038
You´re stupid. IQ is something elitists fight about and still has not been properly defined.

>>5752052
>low IQ pleb detected

>>5751996
>While you are correct that it is just *pathetic* to brag about an IQ of 118 on a science board for adults
I am the most fucking ngger mature.

>It isn't clever or nice to alienate over 99% of the population by calling them stupid or claiming that science is not for them.
So what you're saying is that if we actually tried science, we'd realize it's not for us?

>>5752038
>Yes. Feynman was clinically retarded. The more astounding it is that he managed to be a good physicist.
So being retarded is not a bad thing?

>Your emotional opinions are irrelevant to science.
Now THIS is what I call edgy.

>>5752067
The scientific method is "edgy"?

>>5752076
No, but you are.

>>5752009
this guy has a point

>>5752238
No, he doesn't. He's posting retarded drivel and displaying ignorance.

physics and math are confirmed for being a real science. there are no girls in both fields.
proposition 1) science => no girls
proof: by design, girls can't into thinking rationally, which is required for scientofic thinking

by proposition 1, psychology isn't a real science

>>5752254
Virgin neckbeards belong on >>>/r9k/. Science is a girl thing.

>>5751848
Because, due to variations in human thought processes, it becomes less about concrete, repeatable experiments and more about predicting what the "average" person would be like.

Psychology is an eleven year-old boy, unwittingly speaking out and down on something that seems abnormal to him. While his mediocre ability to understand has gotten him this far, it is incredibly childish, with no more than speculation keeping him alive. This child is taken advantage of by sadistic old men, who also have lived behind a curtain of ignorance, filtering out truth and letting in only what was easy enough on their feelings to handle. Psychology is not a science because it's absent of educated guessing. It's UNeducated guessing. Only one who understands nothing claims to understand everything.

>>5752289
>Only one who understands nothing claims to understand everything.

Where does psychology claim to understand everything? As a science psychology makes hypotheses with testable predictions.

>>5752293
>As a science
0/10

>>5752296
Do you not understand the scientific method?

>>5752300
>highly controlled experimental conditions
>reproducibility
>predictability

>>5752305
That's what psychology does. Are you claiming those are unscientific?

>>5752307
>That's what psychology does.
0/10

>>5752309
Your ignorance is showing.

>>5752309
What you are currently doing is neither logical nor constructive. Back up what you are implying.

>>5752311
>Statistical surveys
>highly controlled experimental conditions
0/10

>>5752316
>statistics
>not scientific
0/10

>>5752337
What are the laws of psychology?

>>5752343
What are the "laws" of biology? Last time I checked evolution was just a "theory".

>>5752346
>biology
>hard science