Quote:
|
It appears to me that your argument is based on your idea that science needs 100% reliability and validity
|
i wasn't to argue that it is has to be 100% i was going for that it has to try to be. but i think you're right anyway. I think i just assumed that was the goal. i was going to try to support this by finding proper defintions and quotes then i relized that there are about 30 million diferent defintions and opinions on what science is. So i'll withdrawl.
I never meant to imply that phsycology wasn't useful or neccessary. I beleive the opposite to be true and have seen it work first hand. I think since i've only takin begginer courses i was fed mostly early stuff that wasnt as refined and was more questionable than modern psychology.
Quote:
|
No. The difference is that it's a NEWER science. People tend to think of psychology as a non-science because its track record of being right is not overly positive right now. Pretty much everything Freud ever said is crap, for example. It's been wrong a lot.
|
I don't agree with this. Neuroscience is a newer feild and it has a very good track record. i think it might be that psychology has evolved alot since the begining, but i dont have alot of knowlege in this area so i'll leave this to the experts to explain.
Note: I'm still trying to master this tone of voiceless, expresionless, body language free style of communication and im not a great writin' man to begin with. So if im coming off negativly im sorry
