Poll: Do you practice/believe in any pseudoscience?
Yes, divination.
Yes, non-divination.
No.
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply  Post Thread 
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »

Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Author Message
DRLHyper
Unregistered


Post: #1
Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Pseudosciences are all those... 'interests' the people take in that do not have a solid scientific explanation. For example, astrolgy. I allways said: "The astronomer is a wise man, a scientist. The astrologer is a scammer, a thief".

Yet, we see people by the millions partake in astrolgy, horoscopes, and such mysticism.

However not all pseudsciences include divination directly. Others try to disguise it, as with numerology. Other pseudosciences have nothing to do with divination at all, ie: Ufology...

In all honestly, do you believe/practice any pseudscience?

Posting is not needed, however it would certainly be of help.

At a personal level, I disagree with all pseudoscience... I could explain, should my viewpoint be challenged.

19.07.2011 03:55
Quote this message in a reply
Triniteras
Unregistered


Post: #2
RE: Pseudosciences, and people nowdays....

like the big bang, for instance

19.07.2011 04:16
Quote this message in a reply
DRLHyper
Unregistered


Post: #3
RE: Pseudosciences, and people nowdays....

Triniteras Wrote:
like the big bang, for instance

*facepalm*

19.07.2011 04:32
Quote this message in a reply
Killer300
Unregistered


Post: #4
RE: Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Okay, we need to do two things here. Differentiate between so called social sciences, like psychology that do require scientific rigour, something the Austrian school fails at, and real fake science, which is mainly things like... well the Austrian School.

With that in mind, proper science requires empiricism, not rationalism. You need hard evidence, something fields like evolution have. You can not base your judgements on culture, or on what's convient. This has been a massive failing of many social sciences, for they have not had the same scientific rigour attached to them, and today, it's time to do so.

With that in mind, I have numerous criticisms of current psychology. Namely, it relies heavily on assumptions that are convient to our culture, but aren't really true. In the enviroment, peers rule, while parents have little say in truth, outside of economics and abuse factors. So, a parent can mess up their kids, but can't really particularly help them outside of making money and not harming them. This has been heavily studied recently, yet an entire field of psychology still rests on an assumption that was mostly demolished in an 80 page paper. Said paper was backed up by numerous sources, and I've learned of said paper in the Nurture Assumption, which I recommend for reading about psychology, specifically child raising.

These same failings allowed treatments that would today get people in jail for life, i.e. lobotimies, to continue unabated. This is a serious failing, and one we haven't found ways to deal with.

As for economics, the only schools, (in markets, marxism is a complicated mess I don't want to get into which isn't bad but again, complicated) which I've found to apply this rigour is Keynesian schools. Keynes did a very down to earth anaylsis of economics, resulting in utilizing things like aggregate demand. I'm hoping that post-keynesian expanded on this, unlike neo-keynesian which to quote someone on, was a "bastardization," of Keynesian economics.

The problem with both psychology and economics that reduce accuracy are two fold.
A. They are heavily affected by bias, more so than any other field, even things like evolution, simply because so much rides on what these people discover. Entire cultures can be rendered abusive by said findings, and other cultures can be uplifted by them. This creates obvious bias issues. Unless there is a way to somehow get someone to be part of no culture, it will remain very difficult to get people to maintain accuracy in the fields of psychology, while in economics the key will be seperating out good and junk with provable history.
B. It's extremely hard to test theories. In psychology, the enviroment a person is currently in completely changes their mood and how they respond to events, wrecking entire studies at times. Hence, it's extremely difficult to study certain parts of psychology, for it requires tests outside of laboratory conditions. On the economic side of things, you have to study a system, a very complex system, that constantly changes and is tied up with the behavior of millions(and now billions) of human beings at once. We have a hard enough time understanding ONE human being, much less the behavior of millions. Also, the laboratory problem strikes again, meaning it's extremely hard to test things. On top of all that, to study this field, I would argue that a psychology degree should be a requirement, not something that anyone in the Austrian School has, hence, they are not qualified to claim whether something is within human nature, but yet aren't called out on it. You have no idea how much this heavily reduces the accuracy of economics. Keynes suffered from this too, but his theory at least didn't rest too much on psychology, for his theory mainly studies booms and busts. It's more short term, to my knowledge, and because of this, is much more accurate. Determining long term economic growth is, frankly, impossible. There are simply too many factors at play, so Keynes was actually quite correct in stating, "In the long run, we're all dead."

With all of this in mind, here's my point. Do not trust ANY assumptions you have about psychology or economics if it can't be backed up by the same scientific vigour applied to subjects like physics and biology.

19.07.2011 05:04
Quote this message in a reply
DRLHyper
Unregistered


Post: #5
RE: Why people resort to pseudosciences?

My rant-like post was more aimed at the so-called 'paranormal', but, you do make a good point, Killer.

Today's economies are based on the lie of the 'Free Market' which, I myself, have already provided examples as to why such thing can not, and will not, ever exist.

19.07.2011 05:18
Quote this message in a reply
Killer300
Unregistered


Post: #6
RE: Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Well, okay, with paranormal, it suffers from the same problem, it needs to utilize empiricism. If aliens are here or what have you, there should be a scientific way to find out about them. Even if magic were to exist, there should be a way to use the scientific method in order to extract the necessary information from them. If telepathy exists, there should be a scientific way to find out about it.

Now, there are areas that do lend themselves to philosphy, i.e. pure thinking about stuff. However, these are either metaphysical things that aren't really going to affect anyone, or at least not in a normal way, like what's the meaning of life. Although, even these areas are starting to draw from science, like with free will, which I've found to be a false, because of real world issues.

The other area is morality, and this gets complicated. Unless we want utilitarianism, which most of you would probably hate, or a totalitarian technocracy, which would probably be the same thing. However, on the other hand, complete idealism fails, this to me is why Kant can't work. We can't base morality completely in what is basically people thinking. Even this field needs to draw from the real world, like with science.

As for economics, something else to keep in mind is the close intermingling of psychology and economics. This isn't appreciated by most mainstream economists, and those who do study it focus far too much on extremely small scale examples. Said ones are good, but they don't really help the general problem, mainly because people who write stuff like Freaknomics just don't care at all about macro, perhaps because they see it as a freaking mess. I can't really blame them.

19.07.2011 05:33
Quote this message in a reply
DRLHyper
Unregistered


Post: #7
RE: Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Killer300 Wrote:
As for economics, something else to keep in mind is the close intermingling of psychology and economics. This isn't appreciated by most mainstream economists, and those who do study it focus far too much on extremely small scale examples. Said ones are good, but they don't really help the general problem, mainly because people who write stuff like Freaknomics just don't care at all about macro, perhaps because they see it as a freaking mess. I can't really blame them.

Here is a personal experience to prove your point, Killer.

When I was younger, say, a few years ago, I was getting deep into the idea of 'government/political/economical' simulators. That is how and why I found ARS Regendi.

Now, point being, my desire for one made me think throughly ab out how to make one myself. At the time, I was in a technical school - of computer science - so I took up the challenge I myself had made.

Needless to say I failed to make any significant progress, even on paper. Why? Well, one of these days I came to the conclusion that a economical-political simulator, would have to be also a human simulator. That technology and resource is well beyond my means to make true, simply because we can not simulate the human mind. At least not in the present world.

19.07.2011 05:51
Quote this message in a reply
Killer300
Unregistered


Post: #8
RE: Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Yes, actually, to simulate the actual human brain would require a supercomputer that is estimated to maybe come out in 2020. This is the entire human brain with all the neurons firing, not the greatly simplified version we have currently.

Besides that, again, this goes back to Keynes. His analysis works, partially, I think because he takes one event, and just studies it to death. Because he's working with one event, albeit a very complex one, he's able to get a pretty good theory from that. The Great Depression may not be a normal crash, but it's a decent model for crashes. Now, there's the issue of so much happening at once still, but it's a start.
(For others coming to this forum, a list of as many large variables I can think of.)
1. Oversupply
2. Starting of economic interdepence
3. German Debt
4. Employee issues
5. Tariff issues
6. Wildly out of control speculation
7. Agriculture economics going haywire
8. Ecological damage(at least accelerated it with Dustbowl)
9. Hands off policies in certain resulting in wildly out of control issues
10. Wealth wasn't shared

This is just a scratch on a nanometer on the tip of the Iceberg. So, I must commend Keynes from somehow making sense on, what is one of the biggest messes in human history.

19.07.2011 06:08
Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #9
RE: Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Well I didn't know which of the first two options to vote for. I sometimes checkout the horoscope and I also did my birth chart (which really got it right). Astrology has been practiced in every culture throught the entire history of man. I don't believe everything it says, it just makes sense that the way great cosmic bodies are aligned that they do influence things here on Earth. I just take it as a window of opportunity for something or not. But it's not a religion, nor a hobby. For numerology is more like an entertaining venue as long as it's not an unendless string of correlations from domains which aren't related to each other. As for ufologists, some of them do have kind of scientific inquiry to them, but those who treat it with fanaticism and overall apophenia are of course a niche venue Hehe
My formula for life goes something like this:
30%karma 30%fate 30%free-will 10%chance/luck Though some people are governed more by fate than others... Pfeif


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache
19.07.2011 06:59
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DRLHyper
Unregistered


Post: #10
RE: Why people resort to pseudosciences?

Funny thing, that last part Tongue .

But you are correct, astrology has been practiced by almost all civilizations all over the globe, during/from different eras.

My only issue with divination is that it gives nothing, say... Precise. Hence it's unverifiability.

Now about cosmic bodies, my view has allways been that they are too far to do anything anyway. Imagine it as, even if the Japanesse had won the pacific war, they would be too far away to help the Germans on D-Day.

19.07.2011 07:09
Quote this message in a reply
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »
Post Reply  Post Thread 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Meet new people from all over the world der_typ3 0 501 30.09.2020 23:15
Last Post: der_typ3
  'Responsible' gun owner drops weapon & shoots 3 people Helsworth 0 1,305 04.11.2015 17:41
Last Post: Helsworth
  Fat Shaming and Making Fun of Fat People Helsworth 0 1,265 20.05.2014 14:31
Last Post: Helsworth
  Great portraits of famous people Malone 11 3,731 30.11.2012 12:39
Last Post: Malone
Question WHY PEOPLE SMOKE ??? Art888 15 3,591 29.11.2010 21:08
Last Post: DRLHyper

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: