/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9853605]

what did they mean by this?

[Anonymous No.9853627]

>>9853605
They meant that you have a nice containment board, and you ought to stay there.

[Anonymous No.9853650]

Take your cancerous headline thread back to >>>/pol/.

[Anonymous No.9855032]

>>9853650
>>9853627
Can't wait for the school season to start back up again.

[Anonymous No.9855043]

Why do people freak out when we look at things like race with the same scrutiny as other parts of biology? Hurt your feelings or something? Shatter your virtuous world view where everyone is exactly the same? Grow up.

[Anonymous No.9855095]

Yikes, take this toxic garbage to >>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.9855109]

>>9855095
>>9855032
>>9853650
>>9853627
This is what I hate about /sci/
This can very easily be dismissed as social scientific quackery but you brainlets cling to it because that's what half of you are either studying or have a degree in
Enjoy this delicious taste of your own medicine, retards

[Anonymous No.9855132]

>>9855109
yet you don't dismiss it. why not?

[Anonymous No.9855134]

>>9855043
You could find differences between different foot shapes or left/right-handednss, but you ignore them. Why?

[Anonymous No.9855135]

>>9855132
I do. But for a different reason then you most likely.
Either that or you're suffering from server cognitive dissonance because the research in this is just as rigorous as most social science papers

[Anonymous No.9855178]

>>9855135
>The journal has published some of the highest impact papers in personality and social psychology, including major measurement instruments, for instance the original description of the revised version of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire,[3] a paper which has been cited over 1600 times,[4] as well as a paper proposing the third revision of the NEO PI-R NEO five-factor model scales,[5] scales for disgust assessment,[6] theoretically important papers on the structure of personality,[7][8] and substantive contributions to the topic of impulse control and psychopathy.[9][10]

The journal seems to be good quality. If it's so shit, why was it published there?

[Anonymous No.9855192]

>>9855178
>highest impact papers in personality and social psychology
>personality and social psychology
The same point I've been making this entire time.
If you're going to normalize a pseudoscience to the point where people think it's rigorous, then eventually your political opponents will start using the same methods to come to conclusions antithetical to your world view
It's hilarious, really

[Anonymous No.9855219]

>>9855134
Those wouldn’t have social ramifications. Being naturally more prone to lower iq and violence would.
Inb4 iq is a meme

[Anonymous No.9855235]

>>9853605
everyone knows intelligence is linked to genetics. that's why jews are so much smarter than whites, their high IQ from genetics.

[Anonymous No.9855247]

>>9853605
inb4 anti-science leftist screeching
oh, was I too late?

[Anonymous No.9855284]

>>9855219
>Those wouldn’t have social ramifications.
You assume
>Being naturally more prone to lower iq and violence would.
It's not racist to point out a correlation; it's racist to assume it's a causation.
>Inb4 iq is a meme
Oh but it is

>>9855192
As much as you hate it, psychology isn't a pseudoscience

[Anonymous No.9855314]

>cherry pick studies with correlation between pigmentation and aggression in animals
>think this will hold true for humans too
social science does it again

[Anonymous No.9855330]

>>9855284
>As much as you hate it, psychology isn't a pseudoscience
Consider me convinced

[Anonymous No.9855347]

>>9855284
>psychology isn't a pseudoscience
it is by definition.

[Anonymous No.9855394]

>>9855247
many "academics" can't objectively examine humans like they can with other animals. their emotions get in the way

[Anonymous No.9855423]

dude niggers r dumb lmao

[Anonymous No.9855429]

>>9853627
>>9853650
>>9855095
Why do you guys hate science so much?

[Anonymous No.9855438]

>>9853605
Why the homophobia?

[Anonymous No.9855445]

>>9855394
Animal instinct is usually much easier to predict than human behavior as well
>We just love to deceive; especially ourselves.

[Anonymous No.9855460]

>>9855445
well human behavior gets "morality" slapped on top of it, which complicates understanding
animal behavior is examined realistically

[Anonymous No.9855465]

>>9855460
Yeah. It's really telling when psychologists bring biology up as a comparison
They really have no idea what it means to know something

[Anonymous No.9855476]

>>9855465
>“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - upton sinclair
It's difficult for a human to understand another human, when his existence depends on not understanding it.

Humans have a bias not to understand one another, because there's a societal/personal risk to uncovering truth.
Such risk doesn't occur when studying an animal.

[Anonymous No.9855554]

>>9855347
explain

[Anonymous No.9856127]

>>9853605
Jesus has the pol boogeyman infested every poster on sci? can we have a single slightly controversial thread where people address the material without people getting triggered and spamming gb2pol!? We used to argue that some fields arnt hard sciences, but still had threads about them, now it seems we cant even do that. Since I get called a poltard every time, can we list the topics not allowed on sci anymore so I know to avoid them? So far I have
>psychology
>anthropology
>biology
>neurosciences
>climate science
>geology
>AI/ML

[Anonymous No.9856133]

>>9855032
Good for you. May I suggest you take Marching Band? It is fun.

[Anonymous No.9856153]

>>9853650
Sorry about your pigmentation, Deshawn.

[Anonymous No.9856181]

>>9855095
>toxic
Why do science deniers use this word so much?

[Anonymous No.9856215]

>>9855109
Wow you sure showed them.

[Anonymous No.9856218]

>>9855284
>psychology isn't a pseudoscience
>iq is a meme

pick one.

[Anonymous No.9856265]

>>9855554
Definition: pseudoscience is a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

[Anonymous No.9856286]

>>9855284
Psychology isn't pseudoscience over all, but social psychology has reproducibility in less than 40% of trials, experiments, etc. Social psychology is not reliable.

[Anonymous No.9856333]

>>9855192
>pseudoscience
But it is not?

I mean, Soviets selected dogs for personality traits, and reliably change in looks. You can tell a man's intellect from his face in a second. There is obviously a link between looks and traits.

[Anonymous No.9856336]

>>9853605
They found a correlation between skin colour, aggression, sexual activity and IQ however they did not find why this is or what caused the population to end up this way

So basically, they found that black people, on average, are currently in a worse situation than other people, but don't know why this is

[Anonymous No.9857763]

>>9856333
This is my favorite part about psychology.
The gender part of it annoys conservatives while the race part bothers liberals
From an objective standpoint it's a take all since the studies are of similar rigor, so you get to watch both sides scramble in cognitive dissonance.

[Anonymous No.9859301]

>>9857763
>gender part of it annoys conservatives
in what way?

[Anonymous No.9859403]

>>9859301
The part relating to gender pronouns, sex as a social construct, pretty much everything relating to transexuals, pedophobia, etc...

[Anonymous No.9859416]

>>9859403
Most of that is not science though, they also say race is a social construct
I haven't read anything about pedophillia
You can still prove gender dysphoria to be a mental illness based on current theories of gender like gender schema theory
WHO declassifying gender dysphoria as a mental illness was based on political reasons rather than scientific

[Anonymous No.9859422]

>>9856286
>social psychology has reproducibility in less than 40% of trials
source on that? not that I don't believe you, I'm interested

[Anonymous No.9859427]

>>9859422
https://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248

[Anonymous No.9859431]

>>9859416
>WHO declassifying gender dysphoria as a mental illness was based on political reasons rather than scientific
How about when the DSM de-classified homosexuality as a mental illness?
You might not like it, but Psych is inherently political

[Anonymous No.9859439]

>>9859431
>Psych is inherently political
I don't deny that, but you can sift through the evidence for yourself and see what is actually known

[Anonymous No.9859444]

>>9859416
>most of that is not a science
...It's literally part of the study of sociology. Race as a social construct because it serves as an identifier various social groups. "Doing Gender," the breakthrough sociological paper on what it means to perform gender first coined in 1977. A lot of these studies have statistical studies to back up their claims, though they're dubious a lot of the time. The ones on how location is a much better indication than IQ or race on traditional success in the US are pretty cool. I'm no social scientist, but the ones that like to investigate deeper into inexact yet fairly accurate reasons behind why society works the way it does are doing pretty good work. I'm fond of work that asks questions about factors that influence how various social groups think and live rather than the ones that claim some justified claim that "group X does Y because that's just how they are ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"

Of course, that sort of stuff doesn't really get hits on /sci/. IQ thread here, which race is best thread here, what major means you're the smartest thread. etc.

[Anonymous No.9859453]

>>9859439
>but you can sift through the evidence for yourself and see what is actually known
That's fair, and I don't deny psych outright.
It's just dangerous to engage with a field that's so bipolar in its conclusions to the point where you need to read each and every study to verify they aren't simply spewing out bullshit

[Anonymous No.9859520]

>>9859431
Pretty sure it was declassified because it was no longer seen as harmful. They’re definitely jumping the gun on the trans thing though - unless they’re preparing to replace the entry with a subtype of psychosis.

[Anonymous No.9859527]

>>9857763
https://nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/

This destroys the liberal

[Anonymous No.9859529]

>>9859520
>They’re definitely jumping the gun on the trans thing though - unless they’re preparing to replace the entry with a subtype of psychosis.
No such plans have been presented publicly as of yet
In fact, the DSM is losing so much credibility between political concerns and financial conflicts of interest that the National Institute of Mental Health had withdrawn all financial support in 2013.
The fact of the matter is that having a panel of experts vote on what qualifies as an illness is the absolute antithesis of science.

[Anonymous No.9859542]

>>9859453
>bipolar
Ironically the name of one of the few mental disorders psychiatry has pretty much nailed. I have no idea why they decided on using lithium and lamotrigine as treatments, but it was a damn good decision, and it gives evidence that it’s possible to know *something* about the human mind with absolute certainty.

Not to say BD has anything resembling a cure. On the whole, the disorder is usually devastating and its symptoms can eventually overwhelm the medication. But the availability of these meds is crucial for those experiencing a manic episode. Waiting an episode out can result in permanent brain damage; being able to prevent such a thing is a massive achievement in psychology and modern medicine.

[Anonymous No.9859545]

>>9859529
Generally speaking they define a mental disorder as one which leads to "significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom"
It's a shame they don't apply that across the board
It also seems like with some politicized issues they expect society as whole to change their thinking towards it rather than trying to help the often small minority of individuals who suffer with mental disorder to adapt to the majority

[Anonymous No.9859990]

>>9859545
Crazy people need all the help they can get, bro. Ya gotta be nicer to them than they are to you, or you’ll have an influx of violent hobos on your hands. Educating the public on how to deal with a psychotic individual isn’t politics; it’s just a good idea.