General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: I hope you see that I am not opposed to psychology.

Posted by pbarach on July 15, 2017 at 04:38:14:
Whether psychology is or isn't a science is an unending and complex argument. Also, psychology isn't a unitary field. When I am working as a psychotherapist, there is a lot more art than science involved in how I work with each patient, but there is underlying science about what types of treatment and what kind of therapeutic relationship is likely to be effective. On the other hand, if I am conducting research, science is at the fore in the choice of research methodology and measurement strategies.

One of the most clearly "scientific" aspects of psychology is the use of statistics to identify the psychometric properties of psychological tests. Aside from the question of whether the Myers-Briggs polarities are taxonomic (I vs. E, P vs. J, etc.), the psychometric characteristics of the MB itself are poor. That is evident because research shows that the "types" aren't reliable (i.e., people's types are not temporally stable) or valid (they don't predict real world behavior).

You can argue about how well-designed these studies are, but you can't argue with the hard, cold numbers in their results--that's where the science of psychology is precise.