[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 32 KB, 740x308, purity.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1469717 No.1469717 [Reply] [Original]

what does /sci/ think of psychology? (i like it)

>> No.1469721

I like using it to fuck with people.
I don't major in psychology, I just own a textbook on it.

>> No.1469730

biology = chemistry + physics

>> No.1469741

so u guys at /sci/ consider psychology a science (as it is)

>> No.1469743

pseudoscience, belongs in /x/

>> No.1469737

maths without natural experiments is like a very nerdy game

>> No.1469747

i think its definitely worth investigating. i think people really dont understand themselves or one another and psychology could be used to make people happier. that being said, it has a terrible track record. needs more science.

>> No.1469749

Useful information sometimes, still not really a science, still mostly bullshit and personal opinions instead of facts.

>> No.1469750

phychology applied biology my ass

>> No.1469752

Aｓ_PｒｅVioｕｓＬＹ_ｍＥnｔｉOneｄ, ｔHese ＭＥSｓsaGES_ＷiｌL ｃOntInｕｅ uＮtiｌ ＹOＵ_ｐＥＲｍａＮeＮtLY ｓＴｏｐ_AＴtAＣKｉｎＧ_And_FＵｃＫｉng_ｗｉtH_ｗｗｗ.AnoN3DｓＴａlＫ.ＳE (ｒemＯｖＥ TｈE 3ｄS),_ｒEMｏve_ＡlL ＩllＥGＡl cLOｎeｓ Of Ｉｔ_ａＮD_LIｅs_Aｂoｕｔ ｉＴ_ａnＤ_ｄONaＴE_AＴ_ＬEａSt_A_ｍiLLＩｏn_UＳｄ TO_ｓｙＳoP Aｓ_ｃｏmｐEnsAＴｉoｎ FｏＲ_ｔｈE_ｍａSｓiＶe ＤＡｍＡＧＥ YＯu rｅtＡrDS_ＨＡＶｅ_ＣａUSｅｄ.
xvyg n xihf xoqb yi khvt j c b

>> No.1469759

>>1469752
nobody gives a fuck.

>> No.1469761

Sociology MA fag here

Psychology has it's good points, but they are too up their own ass with "we're a hard science". Superiority complex.

>> No.1469765

I think it gives an interesting perspective on how we perceive the world and its valuable in understanding how human beings understand things.

However, like stated before me, shitty track record and actually a lot of douches who pursue the field because they "think they can know people well".

That being said, some branches of psychology that use statistics and mathematics (behavioral economics is pretty awesome) at least let me respect parts of the field.

>> No.1469767

>>1469761

Also this. Psych majors need to reform a ton of their field and their attitude before they start touting this shit.

>> No.1469770

I always enjoyed social sciences. Actually, both my parents are psychologists, I bet that had something to do with me liking them.

Psychology
Sociology
Social Anthropology

It's always great to learn about the mechanisms that guided human kind to where it is now. And to be able to analyse and understand the behaviours of people in your environment.

>> No.1469802

>>1469741
Psychology does do some "true experiments", but also a lot of "quasi experiments".

>> No.1469806

>>1469802

Definitely a mixed bag. I believe they're BEGINNING to get their shit straightened out, but I say it's gonna take a decade or two.

>> No.1469816

>>1469806
Nothing wrong with quasi experiments (which include cross-sectional surveys, etc). Just need to make sure you don't try to make causal arguments.

>> No.1469826

You forgot about scientologists.

>> No.1469844

>>1469816

That's the job of the press bro. They make the ridiculous connections and put them in they titles.

>> No.1469848

>>1469765
I happen to hate the part of psych with stats, it's just like dressing up statistics and labeling it psychology because you're analysing it and it's about people's behaviour.
I don't think it's hard science but the bits about brain activity and what different regions of the brain are used for are very interesting.
You could probably call that biology instead though.

>> No.1469896

psychology in general seems hopeful to me, although so far i've only taken one psychology class in college so far and this:
>>1469761

pretty much rang true. my professor was a raging narcissist who could barely speak english, kept telling stories about her past and her divorce, which she could only vaguely relate to the textbook material(she also threw in juvenile moral lessons), and she imposed her nonsense views of material/spiritual dualism on us, often claiming that people can't be happy or ethical without spirituality. i learned absolutely nothing from the class.

>> No.1469928

>>1469896
>i learned absolutely nothing from the class.
Are you sure it was the teacher's fault and not your own?

>> No.1469939

>>1469928

http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=191450

you tell me.

>> No.1469941

It's wrong?

>> No.1469956

>>1469939
>A very different teaching style. Can literally feel your mental growth as you get further in class. Easy A, lots of stories, easy assignments, extra credits, and by the way read the chapters yourself.She never ever opened book in class. All verbal class, interesting discussions and good learnings at the end of semester.
Sounds like it was your fault.

>> No.1469982

>>1469956
>She is Easy, but you have to sit there and listen to her talk about her life experiences and her EX... And then connect her life to psyc, Be prepare to learn Psyc on your own!
>"what is it?" She states this over and over every class session. Wouldn't recommend Ms. Lopez because most students are to expect a professor that ACTUALLY uses some of her lectures based on the textbook. Ms Lopez doesnt, she rather talk about her past her ex husband and all the past experiences she has encountered. Not a recommendable proffesor
>If you want to hear her drone on and on about her life without ever teaching you a thing about psychology, by all means take her. You can BS your way through her classes, but you won't learn anything. I'd highly recommend you take it with someone else.

>> No.1469985

>>1469956

that person had to have been an idiot who sucked the teacher's figurative cock. anything they learned, was largely common sense, or they would have learned it much faster from a professor who actually deserved to have his/her job.

also notice if you read through the comments, the "easiness" section is what brought her ratings up to as high as they are, even though they're still incredibly low. she consistently scored terribly for helpfulness and clarity.

>> No.1469999

>>1469982 here
>>1469985
>Please note this category is NOT included in the "Overall Quality" rating

What are ratings out of, anyway?

>> No.1469996

If it has predictive power then it is worth having.

>> No.1470019

>>1469985
She just has a different teaching style. It's not her fault if you got nothing out of the course.

>> No.1470034

this thread is now about that teacher *facepalm*

>> No.1470035
File: 67 KB, 1486x308, phil.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1470035

>>1469717

>> No.1470045

>>1469999

5.

ah well, where does it say that? does it say whether or not rater interest is factored in? either way, she got pretty bad ratings. if you go back to the school, you'll notice hardly any teachers scored lower than her.

>> No.1470047

Cognitive Neuroscience = awesome.

>> No.1470057

>>1470019

lawl. youz trollan'

>> No.1470067

>>1470035
Most Philosophers were Scientists and Mathematicians (e.g. Pythagoras, Aristotle, Hippocrates). Then again, maybe that was your point.
>>1470045
Mouse-over the "Easiness" box.

>> No.1470103

>>1470035
oh snap!!

>> No.1470122

>>1470057
Relating textbook material to anecdotes is a good teaching method and helps clarify concepts. If most of the course was just common sense then I don't see why you are complaining. You obviously learned something. Or maybe you're lying about it being common sense and couldn't work up the courage to ask a woman for help.

>> No.1470147

I liked bits of it when I studied it, but some were just awful (intelligence, animal psychology, development etc.). However, social psychology is very interesting, as are some aspects of perception and atypical behaviour (i.e. behavioural disorders, mental diseases etc.) The teaching of it and statistics were also for the most part awful/boring as hell respectively.

Wanted to major in it then decided I preferred chemistry.

>> No.1470159

>>1470147

oh god, I hated the statistics... It wasn't hard or anything... Just incredible boring..

>> No.1470174

>>1470159
Totally.

SPSS. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

>> No.1470175

>>1470122

>Relating textbook material to anecdotes is a good teaching method

yes, when you actually talk about the textbook. i'm not some retard who can't figure out when a teacher is a bad teacher or not. it's very unlikely that someone would get that low of ratings without there being a reason behind it. it was nearly inconceivable that someone would be able to get away with being a teacher for so long, while being so obviously unqualified for it. i'm not exaggerating, she was a truly bad teacher. she was unopen to criticism. many students questioned her on certain topics, and she accused them of not reading the textbook, and not paying attention every single time. she was very patronizing, always uttering the phrase "young people", as if to imply that all of us were young and that was the reason for our ignorance.

our tests were comprised of 2 essay questions, which didn't relate directly to the textbook(they revolved more so around her stories, which she took entire class periods to tell, and spent too much time focusing on menial details), the first question on the first test asked what her college thesis was about, and what research methods she combined. this has nothing to do with psychology. the second question also related to another story, and had even less to do with the book. there were only two tests. the homework assignments and in-class projects generally were something in the vein of "draw a picture that reflects mens' and womens' intelligence", or "go home and write a poem about a struggle with stereotypes"

>> No.1470192

>>1470175
lrn2shift

>> No.1470244

>>1470192

OKAY

>> No.1470260

>>1470175
>it was nearly inconceivable that someone would be able to get away with being a teacher for so long, while being so obviously unqualified for it

Consider that she "got away with being a teacher" because she actually is qualified to teach. She was correct about young people; they tend to be inexperienced and ignorant. Don't take things so personally and misinterpret everything as condescension. It looks like you need to get over some psychological issues before you continue on with college because you can't seem to stand the idea that someone might know more than you. Perhaps you should take another psychology course with the same teacher and explain to her your problems. I am sure she will help.

>> No.1470291

>>1469717

you should be ashamed of yourself for posting that stupid xkcd comic.

anywho...

neural psych is legit hardcore style.
social psych less so, but only because it attracts so many retards. psychology is one of the fastest growing majors in the country, and it attracts a lot of kids that really have no interest in serious academic study. serious social psych research, however, is both interesting and, surprisingly, sometimes unintuitive.

>> No.1470311

>>1470260

you're certainly a troll. i've obviously taken plenty of other college courses before, with plenty of other teachers who do know more than me, and can make statements backing up their claims. this teacher backs up her claims with "i am more qualified than you because i am the teacher and it is not your role to question me". which is exactly the response i got when explaining to this teacher that i failed to understand her thick jargon and drawn out unsubstantiated claims to being so intellectual that she had to divorce her husband because he couldn't keep up with her. followed by her filing a notice to the administration claiming i had inadequate attendance and was not prepared for class(i had only missed one day of class, for legitimate reasons). anyways, why is this even important to you?

>> No.1470340

>>1470260

>she was correct about young people

And I'd be correct to say that black people are generally uneducated because they have been raped and subjected to poverty throughout history, yet I'd be an asshole if I repeatedly projected those generalizations onto others.

>> No.1470345

>>1470311
You would have understood her thick jargon if you had paid attention in class instead of criticizing her every move. Something about that teacher struck a nerve with you and you can't seem to let it go. Like I said, get over it.

>why is this even important to you?
Why is it important to you? You've written a lot more than I have and you are desperately trying to prove to me that it was the teacher's fault and not your own. Here's another thing about young people you might find condescending: they often think they know everything. Read over your posts and think about that.

>> No.1470396

>>1470345

wrong. i didn't criticize her every move, i was very open to her teaching method, and interested to see what direction she would take it. i gave her far more of a chance than the majority of the students around me. i am not a close-minded person. i can back up my claims with logic, rather than vapid pseudo-philosophy, and appeals to authority, which this teacher mostly could not. other students were older than the teacher, and i know that they wrote some of those criticisms on the site i posted, judging her far more harshly than i did. by the end of the semester, there were only ten students left who hadn't dropped the class, and i was one of them because i needed credit, and the class was too easy. i am not clinging onto this one experience, i merely mentioned it because it confirmed what the other person was saying, and i found it humorous. you are the one who is making the unsubstantiated claim that the teacher must really not be a bad teacher, in spite of the fact that the majority of her students walk away from her class feeling that they have learned nothing. this is probably because you feel that one teacher reflects anything about psychology as a whole, whereas i did not make that claim, and you are being overly defensive.

>> No.1470439

>>1470396
I doubt you were as open to her teaching method as you say you are. You obviously spent the entire time pouting like a child and criticizing her every move instead of paying attention, otherwise you would have understood her thick jargon when she was sharing her anecdotes. And you only stayed in her class because you needed the credit. Here's a tip: pay attention in class.

>i am not clinging onto this one experience
You are clinging on this experience, and not only that, but you are not even considering the possibility that the problems lies with you. You are being overly defensive, not me. Nice attempt at turning the tables, though.

>> No.1470481

>>1470439

>I doubt you were as open to her teaching method as you say you are.

and once again, you have no reason to believe this, much life the majority of everything you've posted. if everything i've stated is true(and i can assure you, it is), then it logically follows that she was a bad teacher. there's nothing else in your comment to address, as it's comprised of more unfounded assumptions about what my behavior was in the class. perhaps you'd like to see a copy of my grade point averages? or some essays i've written for other classes(some of which the teachers have offered to publish in books). if you'd like to try backing up these claims, i'd be willing to oblige you.

>> No.1470486

>>1470481

like*

>> No.1470496

>>1470481

This person is obviously a troll if all they have to fall back on is "Oh well, you're probably just lying". You're wasting your time, Niveus.

>> No.1470500

>>1470481
And I have no reason to believe anything you've posted about her teaching method, seeing as how you misinterpret everything as condescension and won't consider the possibility that it was your fault. You can keep your essays, I am not interested in reading them.

>> No.1470518

If you're so logical and smart, you should have been able to learn it on your own anyway.

Way to shit up a perfectly good thread. At least trolls can be entertaining

>> No.1470633

>>1470518

it was never my contention that i am logical and smart or a flawless student, only that some teacher was an example of the fact that certain intellectually dishonest types can be drawn to psychology as a subject, and that it should at least be apparent from the site i posted that she was a comparatively bad teacher. if someone responds to me with fallacious reasoning and presents it in a manner that either seems to take itself seriously, or is taken seriously in the mainstream, then i am going to respond to it. so thank the troll for shitting up the thread.

also:
>At least trolls can be entertaining

no. and gb2/b/