Psychology is Not a Science
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 มี.ค. 2019
- Episode 13 in the Therapy Thoughts series argues that psychology is not a science, and explains why that's important.
Therapy Thoughts is a series dedicated to providing information about therapy, mental health, and related subjects. It is intended for anyone considering therapy, or wanting to learn more about one therapist's way of seeing things.
Please remember that a video is not a substitute for professional help. If you need help, contact a local mental health provider. One place to start looking is at www.psychologytoday.com/us If you have health insurance, you may be able to get access to therapy by contacting your insurer. In many places there are nonprofit agencies that offer low-cost services -- search using terms like "local mental health agency"
If you are feeling suicidal or need urgent help, please contact the National Suicide Hotline at 1-800-273-8255. - ภาพยนตร์และแอนิเมชัน
Man, that was beautiful to listen to. I am from Brazil and i agree with you 100%. "We don't want it to be a science".
Psychology is the branch of science
I can't convey to you how helpful and comforting it was to hear your thoughts. I'm a therapist who regularly struggles with these concepts, frantically searching for "the right techniques" while observing that generally the best thing to do is follow my intuition rather than a book I read in school. This is why imposter syndrome is something I battle. The more I can accept that what I do is actually an art, the more I think I can let that anxiety go. Thank you so much.
You're quite welcome. It's lovely to hear that you found the video helpful. I think we all struggle with imposter syndrome and it's a mixed bag. On the one hand if it means we stress ourselves out with worries that we don't measure up, that's not very helpful. On the other hand, if it means we are always searching for ways to improve our work and ourselves, that seems cool.
Do therapists and those in similar professions have an understanding of the world that they can bring to the work, even if they can't prove it scientifically? I choose to believe that. And I choose to believe in you, and in your intuition.
@@thattherapyguyasher956oh yes it really really truly truly is science
You’re not science
@WilliamiteWilliamiteStudiosWWS
What an odd thing to write.
@@geoffreyforbes9568 coz it is what you deserve
Branch of psychological science biological psychology cangnative neuroscience nuropsychology helth psychology developmental psychology evolutionary psychology psycho chemistry psychopharmachology etc
Oh yes it really truly is science
You’re not science
So to you something that relies on a person's subjective view's opinion's and experience's with no objective measurements or understanding qualifies as science?
How does this make sense ?
If this qualifies as science than anything can.
He’s saying it doesn’t
Something that relies on a person's subjective view's opinion's and experiences with no objective measurements or understanding does not qualify as science. We agree.
How is observing behavior from superficial lenses and interpreting from your narrow, biased perspectives and assumptions leading to facts (the objective of Science)? That sounds more like subjective reasoning, opinions of the popular kids on how they feel about others, assumptions and stereotypes of how people think and act and how they should think and act, and so on and so on. A whole book can be written from this angle. Not to mention the corruption weaved in with money and power and so on and so on. How in the world is clinical psychology or therapy a science? Anyone who claims some study of 100 people leads to scientific breakthroughs and facts, and presents as a science, is either dumb or corrupt. Say for instance, if I know for a fact what you're, as a therapist, saying about me is wrong and it stems from superficial observations not even interacting, then is it safe to conclude you're so-called science is false and so you're either dumb or corrupt?
How do we know the study was not tainted? How do we know the rule of suggestion was not introduced to sway to support some hidden agenda? How do we know to assume good intentions?
How can you form some sort of diagnosis without ever speaking to the person? There's too much room for high margins of error. Suspicious to call a science if there exists outliers where it's known for a fact not true even if others may not know as a fact.
Life is complicated and so the study of it must be complicated and not reduced to simplifications and rules of thumb.
I get your point, and I share it to an extent. however believing things to be true just on the basis of a personal feeling is dangerous. I know it might sound extreme, but Nazis felt that what they were doing what's right, and that their motives for doing so were true
I share your main concern, but respectfully disagree with your application of it in this instance.
We all believe things to be true based on personal feeling. For example, we might think that forests are beautiful or that life is worth living. These are not facts, they are beliefs. But that's OK, because they don't harm anyone.
What you're referring to is using personal feeling as a basis for action -- whether with friends and family, or in the public sphere, without applying critical thinking.
When human beings have a belief such as a bias, a hunch, a worldview, they have a choice. One option is to ignore all other ideas and risk terrible outcomes, as you point out.
Or, they can apply critical thinking to that belief -- like asking "Why do I believe this to be true?" "Where did I learn this?" "What merit is there in the counterargument?"
Critical thinking requires assessing multiple points of view. It requires humility and an openness to learning.
So your concern regarding the risks of the many times when people act in the political sphere on the basis of feeling ALONE I share.
But that's not what I'm advocating in the video. I'm saying that I act on feeling in my role as a therapist because I have examined the available so-called science, and largely found it insufficient, inapplicable, or worse, misleading.
If someone were to invent a scientific breakthrough, a device that magically helped people achieve mental health, without negative effects, at a rate of success even approaching what feeling-based psychotherapy achieves, I would GLADLY retire and send all my clients to go buy the device.
I'm jsut using the feeling-based approach because it's the best available tool at this time, not because I'm anti-science.
Something I meant to say in the video but left out was that I am a big advocate of science in the appropriate domains. If a skyscraper is going to be built in my town, I want a civil engineer who knows the science to approve it. Like you, I don't want an amateur gazing at the plans and saying "Feels about right." I am writing this note just after receiving a Covid-19 vaccination. I did my best as a non-expert to learn about the efficacy and the risks, and placed my trust in the scientists because they conducted large-scale studies with significant rigor. The scientific method is highly appropriate to immunology, biology, epidemiology and many many other fields. I'm merely saying it doesn't work in some fields. It's like art, or music. Would you want hear a symphony from someone who applied the scientific method, or would you want to hear Beethoven?
I would add that a very important thing to do when acting on the basis of feeling is to be clear about it. If I have a hunch, something to say that might help my client, and I suspect that they don't already think it, I usually say something like, "I don't know if this is true. But I have a feeling that there's something particularly important about what you just said. I noticed you said the same thing in passing last week. My theory -- and I could be wrong -- is that the frustration you mentioned with your girlfriend is related to the frustration you mentioned with that previous relationship, and that your response to this one is more about the previous one. Is that fair to say?"
That gives the client a chance to weigh the possibility and apply their own critical thinking. If they can say "That's not quite right, here's what is closer to true," then that's great. I don't need to be right. I am just responsible for trying to help.
Thank you very much for your thought-provoking comment.
Biological psychology
Physiological psychology
Mathematical psychology
Congonative neuroscience
Psychology will be considered a hard science in the future when we truly realize that uneducated and traumautized automatons have alot of influence in society and need to be helped. What causes a president to go along with burning down an entire rainforest? Hint: Twisted psychology.
Psychology is a pure science
Give me more laughts.
@@arthasmenethil8796 biological psychology physiological psychology mathematical psychology is a natural science
@@historicalfacts7609 But according to the guy in this video psychology and therapy depends on the psychologist subjective feelings, opinions and views of the psychologist.
How is that scientific?
He even admitted he will ignore data that conflicts with his opinion and feelings.
This is going against the scientific method.
Lol my set of experience and emotions is also a science.