For example, what is happiness? How do you measure happiness? How do you detect happiness? How do you produce happiness? How much happiness do we need? How much happiness can we feel? Can we feel too much happiness?
Now if you asked me the same questions about haemoglobin I could tell you every single answer, and they would be proven facts.
How much haemoglobin can we feel? Can we feel too much?
I think what laura is saying there's a larger non-scientific part to psychology than other sciences.
But when you say science has to be proven facts, then you disregard, 'theories' which encompass a lot of science surely?
Yeah that's what I mean, personally for me, the non-scientific part is just too large for the whole discipline to be considered a science. There's too much theory and not enough fact.
It's not that science has to always be proven facts, I just think that the theories (or at least most of them) have to have the ability to become proven facts. Otherwise, what is the point in constantly making theories which can never be proven or disproven? That you never have any measurable reliable evidence for? That you can never reliably test for or reproduce? You may as well call religion a science if that's the case.
How much haemoglobin can we feel? Can we feel too much?
:o
Ha ha I knew somebody was going to say that!
If we're going to get technical.... the maximum mean haemoglobin concentration possible in cells is around 36.8g/dL, it is not physically possible for a cell to carry more than that amount. Too much haemoglobin can cause problems with microcirculation leading to inadequate amounts of oxygen transported to tissues.
If we're going to get technical.... the maximum mean haemoglobin concentration possible in cells is around 36.8g/dL, it is not physically possible for a cell to carry more than that amount. Too much haemoglobin can cause problems with microcirculation leading to inadequate amounts of oxygen transported to tissues.
They asked how much can you feel, not how much can you carry.
If we're going to get technical.... the maximum mean haemoglobin concentration possible in cells is around 36.8g/dL, it is not physically possible for a cell to carry more than that amount. Too much haemoglobin can cause problems with microcirculation leading to inadequate amounts of oxygen transported to tissues.
Why is it that some can only have two things in their mind about science?
1. It's a proven fact.
or
2. It's just a theory and so of no worth and exactly the same as believing in God. :rolleyes:
How about a theory that fits more occasions to the point of being useful and tested and some parts have been worked out buy we haven't worked out all the finer points.
Many things are very complex and yet we know enough about them already to understand and use them in everyday life but a few things need to be studied more and conclusions drawn.
We already know enough about the world to know that God the builder didn't do it or in fact exist.
the answer is no. and neither is psychiatry (done by prople who are actual real doctors).
nobody has any idea what a mind is. until they do, there can be no "science of the mind"
the "soft sciences" like sociology and psychology give fascinating insight but are entirely useless for making predictions other than at a very obvious common sense level.
the fact that psychology so-called experiments use the same statistical techniques as drug effects studies seems to fool an awful lot of people ........ its a bit like alternative health practitioners talking about "energy" ........
the fact that psychology so-called experiments use the same statistical techniques as drug effects studies seems to fool an awful lot of people ........ its a bit like alternative health practitioners talking about "energy" ........
for example the karl pearson factor analysis stuff. the 16 pf test says that mathematical logic is valid ! it assigns people to positions on scales. but this doesnt tell you much about the human mind that common sense cant ........
....... lots of books were written "proving " Piaget was correct. lots of psychologists doing lots of experiments on french kids. but it was all total crap. the kids said whatever the adults wanted to hear ..........
..... psychology is just isms that come and go ........ unlike real science there is no progress no building up of knowledge ....... in that respect, sociology is much much better ........
Yes it is. In psychology I have to use statistics, research methods and even sometimes a bit of cross over into biology. A social science, is still a science. When I finish my degree, I will be BSc.
Of course it's a science. You posit a hypothesis and devise robust tests. You then apply statistical analysis to the results and can repeat the experiements and predict the outcome with a known degree of confidence.
They asked how much can you feel, not how much can you carry.
I think it's pretty obvious to most people that you cannot feel haemoglobin, so the equivalent question would be how much can you have/carry. Hence my answer...
Comments
How much haemoglobin can we feel? Can we feel too much?
Yeah that's what I mean, personally for me, the non-scientific part is just too large for the whole discipline to be considered a science. There's too much theory and not enough fact.
It's not that science has to always be proven facts, I just think that the theories (or at least most of them) have to have the ability to become proven facts. Otherwise, what is the point in constantly making theories which can never be proven or disproven? That you never have any measurable reliable evidence for? That you can never reliably test for or reproduce? You may as well call religion a science if that's the case.
Ha ha I knew somebody was going to say that!
If we're going to get technical.... the maximum mean haemoglobin concentration possible in cells is around 36.8g/dL, it is not physically possible for a cell to carry more than that amount. Too much haemoglobin can cause problems with microcirculation leading to inadequate amounts of oxygen transported to tissues.
They asked how much can you feel, not how much can you carry.
Good answer. I have learnt something new today.
1. It's a proven fact.
or
2. It's just a theory and so of no worth and exactly the same as believing in God. :rolleyes:
How about a theory that fits more occasions to the point of being useful and tested and some parts have been worked out buy we haven't worked out all the finer points.
Many things are very complex and yet we know enough about them already to understand and use them in everyday life but a few things need to be studied more and conclusions drawn.
We already know enough about the world to know that God the builder didn't do it or in fact exist.
Accept reality and stop avoiding it.
nobody has any idea what a mind is. until they do, there can be no "science of the mind"
the "soft sciences" like sociology and psychology give fascinating insight but are entirely useless for making predictions other than at a very obvious common sense level.
What I'm saying is that if you want to criticise something then it helps if you know what it is you're actually criticising - and you clearly don't.
Can you give an example of this?
for example the karl pearson factor analysis stuff. the 16 pf test says that mathematical logic is valid ! it assigns people to positions on scales. but this doesnt tell you much about the human mind that common sense cant ........
Say no more......
...... so hav a look and see which bits YOU think are "science" !
I think it's pretty obvious to most people that you cannot feel haemoglobin, so the equivalent question would be how much can you have/carry. Hence my answer...
I could say the same for you with science, unless you have a science degree that you haven't mentioned?