126
127

/r/science mod post: "Our official stance is that transgender is not a mental illness, and derogatory comments about transgender people will be treated on par with sexism and racism, typically resulting in a ban without notice." (np.reddit.com)

aboardthegravyboat が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]JexInfiniteTea Party Conservative [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Modern science

You mean modern pseudo-science. If it doesn't follow the scientific method, it is not science, but pseudo-science.

[–]SaccharomycesCerveza [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

What does not follow the scientific method? Be clear.

[–]JexInfiniteTea Party Conservative [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Psychology is pseudo-science.

[–]SaccharomycesCerveza [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Psychology uses the scientific method like any other science. Yes psychology is more subjective, but that is why the scientific method is so important to execute properly in their research. If you're thinking psychology has nothing to do with genetics, biology and the chemistry/makeup of ones brain is where you're wrong.

I don't understand why people like you put your opinion over empirical evidence. Why do we have a multimillion dollar drug industry surrounding psychological diseases if it was founded on "pseudoscience"? You're entitled to think whatever you want, but don't try and claim you understand what is factual and not if you're confused about the definition the scientific method.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6552/abs/378068a0.html

http://www.jsm.jsexmed.org/article/S1743-6095(15)33906-0/abstract

[–]JexInfiniteTea Party Conservative [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I put scientific evidence over 'probably correct' evidence that psychology goes into. Being a pseudo-science doesn't mean it cannot be correct or accurate. It does mean that it does not follow the scientific method.

[–]SaccharomycesCerveza [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I agree with you that some research design is flawed, but you can't dismiss the whole psychological domain as garbage. There's a lot of good research out there. You're starting to lose your argument. You initially stated that psychology did not follow the scientific method, and now you're claiming it does follow the scientific method but you're changing your argument to a criticism of the evidence. You do realize the diversity in psychological studies right? Evidence can be based on chemical levels, brain abnormalities, and real quantifiable information. I'm guessing you're criticizing subjective surveys and observational studies which you're right to do because everyone in the scientific community does. If we both agree on what you claim to be quantifiable evidence, then you cannot dismiss psychology on mental illnesses just like gender dysphoria because there are proven brain and hormonal anomalies present in these individuals.