Psychology- the study of emotion and cognition, is a fake science (no objective units, no reproducibility, no theories based on first principles).
The science you're looking for is Praxeology- the consideration and persuit of means & ends, using the fact that a man acts as the most basic datum. Praxeology is the study of HUMAN behaviour, whereas psychology is limited to the study of other mammals.
>but they gave me a degree Nice appeal to authority you got there.
>but how else are we supposed to run society You aren't. Humans are free animals.
it was much better when things could just acknowledge that they were subjective and philosophy instead of pretending to be scientific or else face ridicule. People have forgltten that something doesnt have to be real to be true and that has caused quite a few issues
Aiden Peterson
>something doesnt have to be real to be true Holy shit, uni grad detected.
Bentley Mitchell
Trans is no longer a disorder - the magic of science.
Lucas Garcia
I am agreeing with you. The problem with psychology is that it conflates fact and fiction.
Oliver Garcia
mfw pollack believing science decreasing mental illness is a bad thing baka
on second thought, you probably just want to stay in good company!
Jose Smith
>I'm agreeing with you. Is that quote I referenced satire, or does it mean something?
Gabriel Myers
>no consistently or validity..... literally have wrote papers on this stuff.
>praxeology: people engage in conscious actions All you have to do is refute this and praxeology falls apart. yes I have read human action former believer in austrian economics, sympathies still exist. I seek a society that does maximize conscious actions but many actions are not conscious.
Priming effects can easily subconsciously direct action and I could go on about conditioning, reinforcements, etc.
Ryan Reyes
I mean do you think greek philosophers leaned on science when they made wild claims? At one point in time it was considered an proper to be able to measure the stars according to both geocentric and heliocentric models because either one might be true. People are too defensive about ideas now, it would be better if psychologists could have an attitude that what they are saying might be wrong
Alexander Thompson
>>no consistently or validity..... >literally have wrote papers on this stuff. What you're studying, so far as you don't study reflexive nature, is praxeology. Which is silly to study.
>refuting praxeology >by inducing choices >which, to refute praxeology, you must claim are not subconscious >and that subconscious action is not possible
muh God is the same as muh Instincts Both are false gods.
