The myth of rituals working - SCI-ART LAB2024-03-28T11:24:09Zhttps://kkartlab.in/forum/topics/the-myth-of-ritual-working?groupUrl=some-science&feed=yes&xn_auth=notag:kkartlab.in,2021-08-29:2816864:Comment:2376412021-08-29T06:55:28.839ZDr. Krishna Kumari Challahttps://kkartlab.in/profile/DrKrishnaKumariChalla
<p><a href="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/9497883480?profile=original" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/9497883480?profile=RESIZE_710x" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p><a href="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/9497883480?profile=original" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/9497883480?profile=RESIZE_710x" class="align-full"/></a></p> http://articles.latimes.com/2…tag:kkartlab.in,2014-01-31:2816864:Comment:1134402014-01-31T02:48:58.529ZDr. Krishna Kumari Challahttps://kkartlab.in/profile/DrKrishnaKumariChalla
<p><a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/13/news/la-ol-blowback-pscyhology-science-20120713" target="_blank">http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/13/news/la-ol-blowback-pscyhology-science-20120713</a><br></br> ology<br></br> Why psychology isn't science<br></br>
By Alex B. Berezow<br></br>
Psychologist Timothy D. Wilson, a professor at the University of Virginia, expressed resentment in his Times Op-Ed article on Thursday over the fact that most scientists don't consider his field a real science. He…</p>
<p><a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/13/news/la-ol-blowback-pscyhology-science-20120713" target="_blank">http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/13/news/la-ol-blowback-pscyhology-science-20120713</a><br/> ology<br/>
Why psychology isn't science<br/>
By Alex B. Berezow<br/>
Psychologist Timothy D. Wilson, a professor at the University of Virginia, expressed resentment in his Times Op-Ed article on Thursday over the fact that most scientists don't consider his field a real science. He casts scientists as condescending bullies:</p>
<p>"Once, during a meeting at my university, a biologist mentioned that he was the only faculty member present from a science department. When I corrected him, noting that I was from the Department of Psychology, he waved his hand dismissively, as if I were a Little Leaguer telling a member of the New York Yankees that I too played baseball.<br/> "There has long been snobbery in the sciences, with the 'hard' ones (physics, chemistry, biology) considering themselves to be more legitimate than the 'soft' ones (psychology, sociology)."</p>
<p>The dismissive attitude scientists have toward psychologists isn't rooted in snobbery; it's rooted in intellectual frustration. It's rooted in the failure of psychologists to acknowledge that they don't have the same claim on secular truth that the hard sciences do. It's rooted in the tired exasperation that scientists feel when non-scientists try to pretend they are scientists.</p>
<p>That's right. Psychology isn't science.</p>
<p>Why can we definitively say that? Because psychology often does not meet the five basic requirements for a field to be considered scientifically rigorous: clearly defined terminology, quantifiability, highly controlled experimental conditions, reproducibility and, finally, predictability and testability.</p>
<p>Happiness research is a great example of why psychology isn't science. How exactly should "happiness" be defined? The meaning of that word differs from person to person and especially between cultures. What makes Americans happy doesn't necessarily make Chinese people happy. How does one measure happiness? Psychologists can't use a ruler or a microscope, so they invent an arbitrary scale. Today, personally, I'm feeling about a 3.7 out of 5. How about you?</p>
<p>The failure to meet the first two requirements of scientific rigor (clear terminology and quantifiability) makes it almost impossible for happiness research to meet the other three. How can an experiment be consistently reproducible or provide any useful predictions if the basic terms are vague and unquantifiable? And when exactly has there ever been a reliable prediction made about human behavior? Making useful predictions is a vital part of the scientific process, but psychology has a dismal record in this regard. Just ask a foreign policy or intelligence analyst.</p>
<p>To be fair, not all psychology research is equally wishy-washy. Some research is far more scientifically rigorous. And the field often yields interesting and important insights.</p>
<p>But to claim it is "science" is inaccurate. Actually, it's worse than that. It's an attempt to redefine science. Science, redefined, is no longer the empirical analysis of the natural world; instead, it is any topic that sprinkles a few numbers around. This is dangerous because, under such a loose definition, anything can qualify as science. And when anything qualifies as science, science can no longer claim to have a unique grasp on secular truth.</p>
<p>That's why scientists dismiss psychologists. They're rightfully defending their intellectual turf.</p> http://www.redorbit.com/news/…tag:kkartlab.in,2013-10-27:2816864:Comment:1113452013-10-27T04:14:16.205ZDr. Krishna Kumari Challahttps://kkartlab.in/profile/DrKrishnaKumariChalla
<p><a href="http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112985833/rituals-and-belief-in-the-supernatural-102613/" target="_blank">http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112985833/rituals-and-belief-...</a><br></br> This article says: Supernatural Reasoning Is An Integral Aspect Of Human Cognition<br></br> But I feel, your behaviour is based on your surroundings and cultural conditioning of your mind. If you are surrounded by people who are into supernatural reasoning, you will get influenced by it. If you are…</p>
<p><a href="http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112985833/rituals-and-belief-in-the-supernatural-102613/" target="_blank">http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112985833/rituals-and-belief-...</a><br/> This article says: Supernatural Reasoning Is An Integral Aspect Of Human Cognition<br/> But I feel, your behaviour is based on your surroundings and cultural conditioning of your mind. If you are surrounded by people who are into supernatural reasoning, you will get influenced by it. If you are in the company of scientists and science who use scientific and detached reasoning, you will get influenced by it.</p>
<p>--</p>
<p>These rituals might bring temporary comfort to the weak minds but they don't change the outcomes of tragedies. Critical thinking and reasoning can strengthen the mind more and bring real calming effect than performing the rituals. Just what does this study aim at? To tell the world rituals are good? Have the researchers tried other methods and compared the results? This looks like a flawed study to me.</p>
<p>My reply to this article:</p>
<h1 class="article-title">Good Luck Gestures Bring Peace of Mind</h1>
<div class="article-dek">Rituals to ward off ill fate help to drive away unwanted thoughts</div>
<div class="article-dek"><a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/good-luck-gestures-bring-peace-of-mind/?nocache=1#postcomment" target="_blank">http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/good-luck-gestures-bring-peace-of-mind/?nocache=1#postcomment</a></div> Only shallow and lowest self…tag:kkartlab.in,2013-05-24:2816864:Comment:1016142013-05-24T01:38:05.749ZDr. Krishna Kumari Challahttps://kkartlab.in/profile/DrKrishnaKumariChalla
<p>Only shallow and lowest self esteem people follow rituals. That is sign of credulity.Those who have no confidence to face the new situation or danger they foolishly doing rituals.I don't think rituals work positively on the contrary they are harmful create more worry losses of self-confidences.</p>
<p>904</p>
<p><a href="http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/531.abstract" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/531.abstract</a></p>
<p>Only shallow and lowest self esteem people follow rituals. That is sign of credulity.Those who have no confidence to face the new situation or danger they foolishly doing rituals.I don't think rituals work positively on the contrary they are harmful create more worry losses of self-confidences.</p>
<p>904</p>
<p><a href="http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/531.abstract" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/531.abstract</a></p>