/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9845918
>Is political science truly a science?
No, because similarly to psychology, sociology, economics, climatology, etc... political scientists do not use the scientific method.

>>9845922
i can see how you would not consider those mentioned as not true science
but surelt psychology is?

>>9845926
>Surely psychology is a science
How new are you?
Psychology is the least scientific on that list, tied with sociology

Studying PS now. It's the furthest thing from a science. It's like phylosophy for non-suicidal non-edgelord people.

>>9846048
very

i always thought psychology as a whole was a science.

i have friends who took it up and they told me how they where still taught the scientific method and all that

>>9846887
So who do you prefer to listen? A guy studying it or some random anon?

>>9846931
Surely the person studying it has a conflict of interest.

>>9845918
>Is political science truly a science?
>and as such may it be discussed here?
I mean laughing at trumptards isn't too bad, but political science offers to reliable way of testing "results"

>>9846887
Following the scientific method alone isn't enough for a field to be considered science
To be a science you must be
>Rigorous
>Falsifiable
>Follow the scientific method
>Offer a cohesive model
If you only do one of these you are not a science

>>9846958
>>Rigorous
>>Falsifiable
>>Follow the scientific method

Stop reading popsci, faggot.

>>9846978
Great rebuttal retard

>>9846978
Also like how you don't even try to claim it offers a model of any kind

>>9846978
The idea of falsification is very simple. There must be a hypothetical situation that can't be explain by current theory. That's the main idea of scientific method.
If there is no such situation, if theory can explain everything, then it's not scientific theory. Religion is an example of such theory.

At least some political theories can be considered as science (marxism for example), because we can imagine a situation that can't be explain by that theory.

>>9847069
>>>/reddit/

>>9846978
>faggot
Why the homophobia?

>>9847084
>homophobia
Why the Islamophobia?

>>9847578
>Islamophobia
Why the antisemitism?

>>9847069
kindly elaborate on as to why you consider marxism a science.

>>9845922
Brainlets who probably didn't even go to college

>>9846887
Literally what. Psychology lacks any real predictive power.
The best they can do is draw conclusions after the fact.

>>9848081
Psychology's issue is that they'll make broad stroke claims about all of humanity but it may only apply to people of a particular cultural background and when they get proven wrong they just double down and act like they're smarter than everyone.

>>9845918
No. Everything with "science" in its name is not a science.

>>9848120
although i dont necessarily agree
i didnt notice until now that any thing with science in the name can be debated as a science

>>9848099
not necessarily. alot of psychology topics are probably universal to a large extent/degree.

>>9845922
how is climatology not a science?

>>9846937
not really because alot of psychology students dont give a shit about it being a science.

>>9846980
hes got a point though.

>>9847069
is marxism rigorous? does it follow scientific method? didnt popper call it a pseudoscience?

>>9848499
>He's got a point
When more than 50% of psychological studies have incorrect conclusions, you can pick any study at random and assume the compliment to the conclusion and you would be more likely to be correct than the author of the study.
If you want to say that more than 50% of psychology is "pop psy" that's fine but at least be honest that there's a huge problem
>Also want to bring up that he tacitly admitted that psychology doesn't conform to the scientific standard of creating models.

>>9848507
replication crisis is overblown. and theres plenty of psych models.

>>9848768
>replication crisis is overblown.
https://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248
>and theres plenty of psych models
If you're calling those voted on "mental disorders" models in and of themselves then you have no idea what constitutes real science let alone knowledge

>>9848499
the reason i didn't take psychology is because in the only feasable college i could enroll in its given as a bachelor of arts degree, and being the foolish 17 year old at the time i was, it turned me off

>>9849059
bump

>>9848788
yeah but the question is how significant it is. For instance, alot of it may be due to publication bias/even corruption and exact replication is incredibly rare. Then probably the most important think you should consider is how do you compare this to other science fields. In truth this occurs all over science. ive seen an article saying the biomedical science replication crisis is worse than psych and another saying even in physics, 65% of researchers have had failed replication attempts. When you say 50% fail. thats a number without interpretation. you arent looking at base rates and it doesnt tell you the reliability of the effect you find in a psychological theory.

Ultimately if youre going to ask how much this hampers the advance of science, id say definitely not as much as you think because science clearly doesnt advance in a linear clean way like you think it should and lots of misapplications or false conclusions continually happen. Historians of sience have known this for a long time and often use physics as their main model for this. But science still advances in a way similar to maybe natural selection. Obviously it should be improved but it hasnt stopped all the interesting things ive found out in psychology.


And again, people here just think of sci as models of mental disorders. Plenty of models in attention, vision, memory or even social psychology based on robust empiricism and even some use maths. Vision is heavily model-based, the supervisory attention system can recreate common action errors we see in people. Psychological models in social psychology have won someone the nobel prize in economics.

>>9847653
>antisemitism
Why the anti-white?

>>9850699
fuck off racist cunt

>>9845922
Can you stop posting this dumb, inaccurate bullshit on every thread?

>>9851027
>Can you stop posting this dumb, inaccurate bullshit on every thread?
As long as it's accurate I'll keep posting it.

>>9851027
gtfo nigger

>>9851084
>nigger
Why the racism?

>>9851030
its not. youve been told in other threads. now gtfo troll cunt.

>>9851241
>its not.
What do you mean?

>>9851243
your replies are what i mean.this much passion, this little knowledge?

i know youre neet. u dont have to brag.

>>9851260
>this much passion
What do you mean?

>>9845918
Any such field that requires to point to an authority figure, AKA, every argument starts with a "some guy said...", or such, can't be considered as a sicence, science should be independent of the author, and statements should stand by themselves.

>>9851267
you ignore any arguments.

>>9851343
>you ignore any arguments.
Like which?

>>9851345
tis written.

>>9851024
It's OK to be white.

>>9851094
>racism
Why the criminality?

>>9851271
you literally posted this exact sentence in another thread

>>9845918
No way. Some parts of it are alright but the core of it is a heaping piece of shit concerned with petty social conflict and ideology, not with scientific endeavour (such as describing social conflict and ideology). Not only is it removed from the actual politics (not just jacking off to ""theory""") it is the worst at political/social evaluation because it is the most egregious example of what it can be unbridled, devoid of the critical and honest.

>>9851024
THIS

>>9851816
>>9851819
Fuck off to /pol/.

>>9852394
is it really ok to be white? is it really?

>>9849733
>alot of it may be due to publication bias/even corruption and exact replication is incredibly rare.
Stop trying to maybe it away
They tested 100 of the most important studies and those didn't hold up
>If that's the case care to speculate how rigorous the less important studies were?

>>9852431
you havent read my fucking post have you. ignorant fucker.

>>9852394
>Fuck off to /pol/.
/pol/ h8s civic nationalism.