Pseudoscience Thread - Page 2

pbradley · 09.29.2009, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by girlgun

Pbradley is spot on.

Sweet.

girlgun · 09.29.2009, 11:15 AM

Stupid phone

notyourfiend · 09.29.2009, 01:37 PM

^ I have a lot to say about psychology as a pseudoscience. No, you can't deny the existance of things like depression, but there is a lot of false/bad science done in the way we quantify something as subjective as "mental health." Bell curve my ass. And some of the ways which we study the brain are just plain flawed - ie studying the brainwave of schizophrenic patients AFTER they have been medicated. The bookMad In America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and The Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill talks a lot about this stuff.

More importantly however, the effects of bad psychology/psychiatry can be extremely dangerous. Anti-psychotics especially can have sickening reactions.

I would continue, but I'm at work and trying to rush through an assignment.

Rob Instigator · 09.29.2009, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by girlgun

Under those criteria, rob, all sciences are pseudoscience.

Pbradley is spot on.

how is physics not falsifieble?

How is chemistry not falsifiable? either there are reactions or not.

science rules all.

notyourfiend · 09.29.2009, 02:06 PM

yeah, but the narratives in which we express/discuss science are completely political/socially based.

i mean, just look at who is funding the studies.

Rob Instigator · 09.29.2009, 02:31 PM

the narratives in which we express science are not science, because most people have no grounding to be abel to understand most experimental science on it's own terms. that is why I love people like asimov, gould, Sagan, etc. They are able to write for the layperson about difficult subjects without muddying up the science.

notyourfiend · 09.29.2009, 03:26 PM

i don't think it's ever possible to truly separate science/culture because what we view as being natural is part of culture. the experiments we do are the result of what culture is asking for. etc.

Rob Instigator · 09.29.2009, 03:50 PM

whether an atom of gold has x number of protons or not has nothing to do with social mores or societies view of science.
whether or not hydrogen and oxygen combine in a chemical reaction to form water is not dependent on culture, in the LEAST.

true science has no cultural bearing. culture does not matter as to whether a star implodes to become a black hole or just a neutron star.

physics rules all.

notyourfiend · 09.29.2009, 03:52 PM

what im saying is that what we choose to research/focus our studies has complete cultural bearing.

and that we never really know the whole truths of what we are talking on. scientific discourse emphasizes what is important to culture at that time.

yah dig?

gualbert · 09.29.2009, 03:55 PM

^
^ Heil, science!!

(reply to Rob's post)

Rob Instigator · 09.29.2009, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notyourfiend

what im saying is that what we choose to research/focus our studies has complete cultural bearing.

and that we never really know the whole truths of what we are talking on. scientific discourse emphasizes what is important to culture at that time.

yah dig?

only sometimes. there are various avenues to fgo to for research funding. not all of it is govcernment based. much is from private funds and trusts and foundations set up to donate money for research. besides, for much of science, the research and experiments can be done with a minimum of money. if a scientists wants to research ufo's he will do so whether or not there is grant money (which there ussually is not)

I think scientific discourse emphasizes what is improtant to a culture at a given time ONLY if that culture is scientifically intelligent. the current US culture is most definitely NOT sci4entifcally intelligent. too many people canot tell you if the Earth rotates around the sun, much less what quantum mechanics is doing to bring us super computers.

asking for the "whole truth" is a pipe dream. the whole truth is always unknowable for as any question is answered ten new ones spring right up. if our universe is infinite, then information is infinite and asking to know it all is moot.

notyourfiend · 09.29.2009, 06:28 PM

I think that you are misreading the point that I'm trying to make. I'm not saying that science is "wrong," but I'm saying that there are political/moral investments in it which are impossible to ignore. Private funds, trusts and foundations are extremely politicized. Of course, anybody can go out there and call themselves and scientific, conducting UFO experiments or whatnot. But the scientific research which is considered to be a important contribution/worthy of being published/being released tends to come out of established universities (which have investments of their own), and are on topics which are considered "in" at the time. My girlfriend is an editorial assistant at one of the primer scientific publications in the country and she is constantly witnessing evidence in regards to what i am talking about. For example, fields such as evolutionary psych are totally "in" (lots of drug companies have shitloads of investment in those) and studies in evolutionary psychology are much more likely to be studied than it other fields. There have always been and will continue to be scientific movements that respond to the questions of that time. Think the cold war, as we suddenly are finding ways to get to the moon while, at the same time, our culture is enthralled with the idea of escaping our barberic nature and going back to nature (ie the sudden emergence of primatology)

I disagree with what you are saying about discourse being important if a culture is well-educated. I think that science serves as a narrative in which we justify things because they have been proven "truth." there is, in my opinion, a horrific problem with that fact that most people believe things which are scientificly "accurate" just because they were taught that they are proven. Once again, the political implications of this process is absolutely horrific. For example, just think about the consquences which it has had in terms of race.

And I agree, there is never a way that we can grasp the "whole truth." I guess I have an issue with the idea of "process" though because, in my opinion, the world is a mystery with every question and breakthrough complicating matters even more.

gualbert · 09.29.2009, 06:40 PM

Homer: Why do you need new bands? Everyone knows rock attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact.

floatingslowly · 09.29.2009, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

how is physics not falsifieble?

there is no unifying theory.

physics is a pseudoscience.

SuchFriendsAreDangerous · 09.29.2009, 09:00 PM

I'll take Alchemy for a Thousand Sonic Gail, I am on with my brother Newton in the search for the Philosopher's Stone..

phoenix · 09.30.2009, 02:14 AM

what a great thread to start at this forum.

I'm sure it will go well.

pbradley · 09.30.2009, 02:17 AM

demonrail666 · 09.30.2009, 02:36 AM

'The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents.' - H. P. Lovecraft.

Rob Instigator · 09.30.2009, 09:03 AM

atomic theory rules.

SONIC GAIL · 09.30.2009, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoenix

what a great thread to start at this forum.

I'm sure it will go well.

sway told me to do it..so he should get credit..I'm busy at work today so I will rant on about some of my pseudoscience thoughts tommorow...bet yall are surprised I havent yet.

09.29.2009, 11:15 AM	#22
girlgun invito al cielo Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,906	Stupid phone
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 01:37 PM	#23
notyourfiend expwy. to yr skull Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: baltimore, murderland by way of new york city Posts: 1,454	^ I have a lot to say about psychology as a pseudoscience. No, you can't deny the existance of things like depression, but there is a lot of false/bad science done in the way we quantify something as subjective as "mental health." Bell curve my ass. And some of the ways which we study the brain are just plain flawed - ie studying the brainwave of schizophrenic patients AFTER they have been medicated. The bookMad In America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and The Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill talks a lot about this stuff. More importantly however, the effects of bad psychology/psychiatry can be extremely dangerous. Anti-psychotics especially can have sickening reactions. I would continue, but I'm at work and trying to rush through an assignment. __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 02:06 PM	#25
notyourfiend expwy. to yr skull Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: baltimore, murderland by way of new york city Posts: 1,454	yeah, but the narratives in which we express/discuss science are completely political/socially based. i mean, just look at who is funding the studies. __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 02:31 PM	#26
Rob Instigator invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the land of the Instigator Posts: 27,976	the narratives in which we express science are not science, because most people have no grounding to be abel to understand most experimental science on it's own terms. that is why I love people like asimov, gould, Sagan, etc. They are able to write for the layperson about difficult subjects without muddying up the science. __________________ RXTT's Intellectual Journey - my new blog where I talk about all the books I read.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 03:26 PM	#27
notyourfiend expwy. to yr skull Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: baltimore, murderland by way of new york city Posts: 1,454	i don't think it's ever possible to truly separate science/culture because what we view as being natural is part of culture. the experiments we do are the result of what culture is asking for. etc. __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 03:50 PM	#28
Rob Instigator invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the land of the Instigator Posts: 27,976	whether an atom of gold has x number of protons or not has nothing to do with social mores or societies view of science. whether or not hydrogen and oxygen combine in a chemical reaction to form water is not dependent on culture, in the LEAST. true science has no cultural bearing. culture does not matter as to whether a star implodes to become a black hole or just a neutron star. physics rules all. __________________ RXTT's Intellectual Journey - my new blog where I talk about all the books I read.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 03:52 PM	#29
notyourfiend expwy. to yr skull Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: baltimore, murderland by way of new york city Posts: 1,454	what im saying is that what we choose to research/focus our studies has complete cultural bearing. and that we never really know the whole truths of what we are talking on. scientific discourse emphasizes what is important to culture at that time. yah dig? __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 03:55 PM	#30
gualbert the end of the ugly Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,088	^ ^ Heil, science!! (reply to Rob's post)
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 06:28 PM	#32
notyourfiend expwy. to yr skull Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: baltimore, murderland by way of new york city Posts: 1,454	I think that you are misreading the point that I'm trying to make. I'm not saying that science is "wrong," but I'm saying that there are political/moral investments in it which are impossible to ignore. Private funds, trusts and foundations are extremely politicized. Of course, anybody can go out there and call themselves and scientific, conducting UFO experiments or whatnot. But the scientific research which is considered to be a important contribution/worthy of being published/being released tends to come out of established universities (which have investments of their own), and are on topics which are considered "in" at the time. My girlfriend is an editorial assistant at one of the primer scientific publications in the country and she is constantly witnessing evidence in regards to what i am talking about. For example, fields such as evolutionary psych are totally "in" (lots of drug companies have shitloads of investment in those) and studies in evolutionary psychology are much more likely to be studied than it other fields. There have always been and will continue to be scientific movements that respond to the questions of that time. Think the cold war, as we suddenly are finding ways to get to the moon while, at the same time, our culture is enthralled with the idea of escaping our barberic nature and going back to nature (ie the sudden emergence of primatology) I disagree with what you are saying about discourse being important if a culture is well-educated. I think that science serves as a narrative in which we justify things because they have been proven "truth." there is, in my opinion, a horrific problem with that fact that most people believe things which are scientificly "accurate" just because they were taught that they are proven. Once again, the political implications of this process is absolutely horrific. For example, just think about the consquences which it has had in terms of race. And I agree, there is never a way that we can grasp the "whole truth." I guess I have an issue with the idea of "process" though because, in my opinion, the world is a mystery with every question and breakthrough complicating matters even more. __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 06:40 PM	#33
gualbert the end of the ugly Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,088	Homer: Why do you need new bands? Everyone knows rock attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.29.2009, 09:00 PM	#35
SuchFriendsAreDangerous invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: fucking Los Angeles Posts: 14,801	I'll take Alchemy for a Thousand Sonic Gail, I am on with my brother Newton in the search for the Philosopher's Stone.. __________________ Today Rap music is the Lakers
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.30.2009, 02:14 AM	#36
phoenix invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: the future where it's hot and dark Posts: 5,926	what a great thread to start at this forum. I'm sure it will go well. __________________ tiny and lost.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.30.2009, 02:17 AM	#37
pbradley invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: SoKo Posts: 10,621
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.30.2009, 02:36 AM	#38
demonrail666 invito al cielo Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 18,510	'The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents.' - H. P. Lovecraft.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

09.30.2009, 09:03 AM	#39
Rob Instigator invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the land of the Instigator Posts: 27,976	atomic theory rules. __________________ RXTT's Intellectual Journey - my new blog where I talk about all the books I read.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|