Total Posts:40|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Myers Briggs test pseudoscience

Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:04:58 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

This review of research explores characteristics associated with massive open online courses
(MOOCs). Three key characteristics are revealed: varied definitions of openness, barriers to
persistence, and a distinct structure that takes the form as one of two pedagogical approaches.
The concept of openness shifts among different MOOCs, models, researchers, and facilitators.
The high dropout rates show that the barriers to learning are a significant challenge. Research has
focused on engagement, motivation, and presence to mitigate risks of learner isolation. The
pedagogical structure of the connectivist MOOC model (cMOOC) incorporates a social,
distributed, networked approach and significant learner autonomy that is geared towards adult
lifelong learners interested in personal or professional development. This connectivist approach
relates to situated and social learning theories such as social constructivism (Kop, 2011). By
contrast, the design of the Stanford Artificial Intelligence (AI) model (xMOOC) uses
conventional directed instruction in the context of formal postsecondary educational institutions.
This traditional pedagogical approach is categorized as cognitive-behaviorist (Rodriguez, 2012).
These two distinct MOOC models attract different audiences, use different learning approaches,
and employ different teaching methods. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the research
describing the phenomenon of MOOCs in informal and postsecondary online learning.
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are a relatively new phenomenon sweeping
higher education. By definition, MOOCs take place online. They could be affiliated with a
university, but not necessarily. They are larger than typical college classes, sometimes much
larger. They are open, which has multiple meanings evident in this research. While the literature
is growing on this topic, it is yet limited. Scholars are taking notice of the literature around
MOOCs in all its forms from conceptual to technical. Conference proceedings and magazine
articles make up the majority of literature on MOOCs (Liyanagunawardena, Adams, & Williams,
2013). In order to better understand the characteristics associated with MOOCs, this review of
literature focuses solely on original research published in scholarly journals. This emphasis on
peer-reviewed research is an essential first step to form a more critical and comprehensive
perspective by tempering the media hype. While most of the early scholarly research examines
aspects of the cMOOC model, much of the hype and controversy surrounds the scaling
innovation of the xMOOC model in postsecondary learning contexts. Naidu (2013) calls out the
massive open online repetitions of failed pedagogy (MOORFAPs) and forecasts a transformation
to massive open online learning opportunities (MOOLOs). Informed educators will be better
equipped to make evidence-based decisions, foster the positive growth of this innovation, and
adapt it for their own unique contexts. This research synthesis is framed by a within- and
Journal of Interactive Online Learning Kennedy
2
between-study literature analysis (Onwuegbuzie, Leech, & Collins, 2012) and situated within the
context of online teaching and learning.
Frameworks
Literature Analysis
A useful review of literature goes beyond a mere summary of articles by synthesizing the
research on a given phenomenon. Onwuegbuzie, Leech, & Collins (2012) provide a framework
for analyzing and interpreting literature sources in a rigorous way that calls for evidentiary
warrant, transparency, and comprehensiveness. Both within- and between-study analyses are
essential to a comprehensive literature review that examines multiple components within a
research study as well as compares multiple components among studies. While most literature
reviews compare findings, Onwuegbuzie, Leech, & Collins (2012) advocate for also comparing
and contrasting other components, such as frameworks and methods. Along these same lines,
Eisenhart (1998) offers a "groundswell" analogy in describing the hidden treasures that can
spring from a comprehensive literature review. These treasures may disrupt conventional
thinking, expose multiple perspectives from different contexts, and improve understanding and
communication. Boote & Beile (2005), in their seminal work, also advocate for a cumulative
research synthesis that is generative. They expound 12 criteria for a comprehensive literature
review that is categorized in the following areas: coverage, synthesis, methodology, significance,
and rhetoric. Maxwell (2006) points to the centrality of relevance and the importance of
selectivity in literature reviews. In this research synthesis, these frameworks guide a review of
the literature that aims to selectively identify relevant scholarly works and comprehensively
evaluate components within and between sources.

Worthy goals of any literature review are to disrupt conventional thinking, expose
multiple perspectives, and improve understanding and communication (Eisenhart, 1998). This
analysis and synthesis has identified limitations and gaps in the research. The limitations
examined in this review stem from the limited MOOC courses represented in the research, the
limited number of authors represented, and the limited number of peer-reviewed journals. There
is a need for more scholarly research given that MOOCs are a new phenomenon with important
implications for online learning in postsecondary institutions, professional development, and
corporate e-learning. Overlap in future research recommendations focus on better understanding
the learners, types of behaviors, and the social nature of learning (deWaard et al., 2011; Fini,
2009; Kop, 2011; Kop et al., 2011; and Koutropoulus et al., 2012). Rodriguez (2012) points out
the few similarities and vast differences in the two distinct MOOC models, particularly around
pedagogical approaches. As Kop et al. (2011) explain, "A change in the thinking, philosophy,
design, and pedagogies of institution-based online courses may be necessary if the affordances of
emerging technologies are embraced and adopted within formal educational institutions" (p. 89).
Table 4 displays a list of future research recommendations.
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:08:25 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
You never answered the question. That might as well be spam. As far as I'm concerned, psychology is pseudoscience, like astrology. Psychologists do not use the scientific method. Psychologists are not scientists!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:10:09 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

Did you know fire ants can make living rafts? The Queen and larvae fill up the center of the soon to be raft (Logical) while the worker ants link together to form a makeshift raft. This is incredibly intelligent behavior consider they are just arthropods, no surprise then that they are closely related to honey bees, which are the most intelligent invertebrates.

The most basal animal is sponge, this suprises me because this time last year I assumed they were just a plant like a lot of other people. They don't have true tissue layers (Endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) like every other animal group. Hey, speaking of oddities, did you know fungus have chitin? This is interesting evidence of a shared ancestor between them and animals.
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:11:59 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:10:09 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

Did you know fire ants can make living rafts? The Queen and larvae fill up the center of the soon to be raft (Logical) while the worker ants link together to form a makeshift raft. This is incredibly intelligent behavior consider they are just arthropods, no surprise then that they are closely related to honey bees, which are the most intelligent invertebrates.

The most basal animal is sponge, this suprises me because this time last year I assumed they were just a plant like a lot of other people. They don't have true tissue layers (Endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) like every other animal group. Hey, speaking of oddities, did you know fungus have chitin? This is interesting evidence of a shared ancestor between them and animals.

And what does that have to do with "psych"ology? The study of imaginary unfalsifiable concepts?
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:16:50 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:11:59 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:10:09 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

Did you know fire ants can make living rafts? The Queen and larvae fill up the center of the soon to be raft (Logical) while the worker ants link together to form a makeshift raft. This is incredibly intelligent behavior consider they are just arthropods, no surprise then that they are closely related to honey bees, which are the most intelligent invertebrates.

The most basal animal is sponge, this suprises me because this time last year I assumed they were just a plant like a lot of other people. They don't have true tissue layers (Endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) like every other animal group. Hey, speaking of oddities, did you know fungus have chitin? This is interesting evidence of a shared ancestor between them and animals.

And what does that have to do with "psych"ology? The study of imaginary unfalsifiable concepts?

One of my upcoming links is going to have a jumpscare in it by the way.

Thanks to the New Horizons mission, we have a clearer than ever understanding of the Pluto system. Charon has a red pole (If you look in false colour anyway) this is because methane from Plutos atmosphere is being lost into space. Some of this methane will of course end up on Charon. At Charons north pole, there is maximum light exposure, because of this, relatively large amounts of the Methane can be broken down by the UV light into much heavier tholin, which doesn't evaporate as easily and give Charons pole its reddish colour.
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:17:47 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:10:09 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

Did you know fire ants can make living rafts? The Queen and larvae fill up the center of the soon to be raft (Logical) while the worker ants link together to form a makeshift raft. This is incredibly intelligent behavior consider they are just arthropods, no surprise then that they are closely related to honey bees, which are the most intelligent invertebrates.

The most basal animal is sponge, this suprises me because this time last year I assumed they were just a plant like a lot of other people. They don't have true tissue layers (Endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) like every other animal group. Hey, speaking of oddities, did you know fungus have chitin? This is interesting evidence of a shared ancestor between them and animals.

Lol. It looks like "intelligent" behavior. Creationists say it looks like "designed" behavior. Now tell me, are ants using the Id, Ego, or Superego when they make rafts? How does that falsify an "unconscious mind"? It doesn't! When something looks "logical", you say it's because of the "conscious mind", and when it doesn't look "logical" you say it's "unconscious"!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:17:55 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:11:59 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:10:09 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

Did you know fire ants can make living rafts? The Queen and larvae fill up the center of the soon to be raft (Logical) while the worker ants link together to form a makeshift raft. This is incredibly intelligent behavior consider they are just arthropods, no surprise then that they are closely related to honey bees, which are the most intelligent invertebrates.

The most basal animal is sponge, this suprises me because this time last year I assumed they were just a plant like a lot of other people. They don't have true tissue layers (Endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) like every other animal group. Hey, speaking of oddities, did you know fungus have chitin? This is interesting evidence of a shared ancestor between them and animals.

And what does that have to do with "psych"ology? The study of imaginary unfalsifiable concepts?

Here you can see some caecillians: http://slither.io...
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:19:02 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
You have already lost. You're just a spammer!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:19:13 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:17:47 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:10:09 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

Did you know fire ants can make living rafts? The Queen and larvae fill up the center of the soon to be raft (Logical) while the worker ants link together to form a makeshift raft. This is incredibly intelligent behavior consider they are just arthropods, no surprise then that they are closely related to honey bees, which are the most intelligent invertebrates.

The most basal animal is sponge, this suprises me because this time last year I assumed they were just a plant like a lot of other people. They don't have true tissue layers (Endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) like every other animal group. Hey, speaking of oddities, did you know fungus have chitin? This is interesting evidence of a shared ancestor between them and animals.

Lol. It looks like "intelligent" behavior. Creationists say it looks like "designed" behavior. Now tell me, are ants using the Id, Ego, or Superego when they make rafts? How does that falsify an "unconscious mind"? It doesn't! When something looks "logical", you say it's because of the "conscious mind", and when it doesn't look "logical" you say it's "unconscious"!

http://what-if.xkcd.com...
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:22:25 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
"Psych"ology: the study of imaginary unfalsifiable concepts to explain any and all human behavior!

What the hell is a "psych" anyway? Is that like a "creator" of thought processes? Psychology is very similar to creationism!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:22:38 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:19:02 AM, user13579 wrote:
You have already lost. You're just a spammer!

Would you like to hear about Trilobites?
Meh!
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:23:01 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:22:25 AM, user13579 wrote:
"Psych"ology: the study of imaginary unfalsifiable concepts to explain any and all human behavior!

What the hell is a "psych" anyway? Is that like a "creator" of thought processes? Psychology is very similar to creationism!

I have notes on Trilobites.
Meh!
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:26:29 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:22:25 AM, user13579 wrote:
"Psych"ology: the study of imaginary unfalsifiable concepts to explain any and all human behavior!

What the hell is a "psych" anyway? Is that like a "creator" of thought processes? Psychology is very similar to creationism!

Please.
Meh!
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:26:56 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:17:47 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:10:09 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:01:49 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:56:23 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:53:56 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 10:43:15 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:45:51 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:44:50 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:40:08 AM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Maybe because psychologists can do no better than pseudoscience.

It wasn't created by psychologists, it was actually created by a teacher who majored in agriculture, and her daughter.

Apology pls

Nope. I'm redoubling. Psychology is pseudoscience, especially Freudian psychoanalysis.

Ok then, live in your wrong narrow world, night.

Psychology is pseudoscience just like creationism and for the same reasons. Any human behavior can be explained away by saying it's "unconscious!" Unfalsifiable!

https://xkcd.com...

Ok, I'll treat you the same way I treat creationists. Give one an example of an experiment in human behavior that could conceivably falsify the concept of the "unconscious mind." As far as I can tell, you can explain ANY human behavior with an unconscious mind.

Did you know fire ants can make living rafts? The Queen and larvae fill up the center of the soon to be raft (Logical) while the worker ants link together to form a makeshift raft. This is incredibly intelligent behavior consider they are just arthropods, no surprise then that they are closely related to honey bees, which are the most intelligent invertebrates.

The most basal animal is sponge, this suprises me because this time last year I assumed they were just a plant like a lot of other people. They don't have true tissue layers (Endoderm, mesoderm, ectoderm) like every other animal group. Hey, speaking of oddities, did you know fungus have chitin? This is interesting evidence of a shared ancestor between them and animals.

Lol. It looks like "intelligent" behavior. Creationists say it looks like "designed" behavior. Now tell me, are ants using the Id, Ego, or Superego when they make rafts? How does that falsify an "unconscious mind"? It doesn't! When something looks "logical", you say it's because of the "conscious mind", and when it doesn't look "logical" you say it's "unconscious"!

I disagree.
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:28:44 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
What the hell is a "psych", and how do you know that something has a "psych" just by looking at it?
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:43:21 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:28:44 AM, user13579 wrote:
What the hell is a "psych", and how do you know that something has a "psych" just by looking at it?

https://saboteur365.files.wordpress.com...

One of the reasons trilobites are loved so much by Zoologists and Palentoligsts is that they are one of the most diverse preserved groups. This is often due their hard shell and the fact that they spent most of their lives underwater, so could be easily buried by sediments. They existed over 520 MYA and have a bit over 20,000 described species (Likely to be more). Naturally, all trilobite species vary, but their basic body plan is similar in all. They have a cephalon (Essentially a head, think cephalisation), thorax and pygidium. It is believed that trilobites were a mix of scavengers and predators, but of course there were some particle filter feeders (Trilobites were some of the first arthropods, what could you expect?). "Scars" can be found on some trilobite shells, these would remain because it would take several moults (Arthropods moult their shells) to completely heal the wound, hence why "Scars" can be found on some fossils. Because of their (Relative) abundunce, trilobites are often use in biostratigraphy. A common misconception is that Trilobites are the ancestor of notable modern arthropods such as spiders, this is not correct, the Trilobites sister clade "Chelicerate" clade is actually the ancestor group of the spiders.
Meh!
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:46:33 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:43:21 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:28:44 AM, user13579 wrote:
What the hell is a "psych", and how do you know that something has a "psych" just by looking at it?

https://saboteur365.files.wordpress.com...

One of the reasons trilobites are loved so much by Zoologists and Palentoligsts is that they are one of the most diverse preserved groups. This is often due their hard shell and the fact that they spent most of their lives underwater, so could be easily buried by sediments. They existed over 520 MYA and have a bit over 20,000 described species (Likely to be more). Naturally, all trilobite species vary, but their basic body plan is similar in all. They have a cephalon (Essentially a head, think cephalisation), thorax and pygidium. It is believed that trilobites were a mix of scavengers and predators, but of course there were some particle filter feeders (Trilobites were some of the first arthropods, what could you expect?). "Scars" can be found on some trilobite shells, these would remain because it would take several moults (Arthropods moult their shells) to completely heal the wound, hence why "Scars" can be found on some fossils. Because of their (Relative) abundunce, trilobites are often use in biostratigraphy. A common misconception is that Trilobites are the ancestor of notable modern arthropods such as spiders, this is not correct, the Trilobites sister clade "Chelicerate" clade is actually the ancestor group of the spiders.

*paleontologists
Meh!
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 4:04:32 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 11:43:21 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:28:44 AM, user13579 wrote:
What the hell is a "psych", and how do you know that something has a "psych" just by looking at it?

https://saboteur365.files.wordpress.com...

One of the reasons trilobites are loved so much by Zoologists and Palentoligsts is that they are one of the most diverse preserved groups. This is often due their hard shell and the fact that they spent most of their lives underwater, so could be easily buried by sediments. They existed over 520 MYA and have a bit over 20,000 described species (Likely to be more). Naturally, all trilobite species vary, but their basic body plan is similar in all. They have a cephalon (Essentially a head, think cephalisation), thorax and pygidium. It is believed that trilobites were a mix of scavengers and predators, but of course there were some particle filter feeders (Trilobites were some of the first arthropods, what could you expect?). "Scars" can be found on some trilobite shells, these would remain because it would take several moults (Arthropods moult their shells) to completely heal the wound, hence why "Scars" can be found on some fossils. Because of their (Relative) abundunce, trilobites are often use in biostratigraphy. A common misconception is that Trilobites are the ancestor of notable modern arthropods such as spiders, this is not correct, the Trilobites sister clade "Chelicerate" clade is actually the ancestor group of the spiders.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Psychology is pure pseudoscience, like astrology! Trying to predict behavior with imaginary unfalsifiable concepts is like predicting behavior by observing star alignments!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 4:06:29 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
And if someone does something "unpredictable", you just say it was an "unconscious" behavior! LOL it can explain any observation, so it's unfalsifiable!
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 7:44:49 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?

Assuming you're referring to the bimodal system, it would be for the simple matter of utility: They condense some significant behavioral data into handy little acronyms.

Regardless, I'm pretty sure they're not very consistent or reliable. The function stack system is much better.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 8:44:14 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 4:04:32 PM, user13579 wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:43:21 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 11:28:44 AM, user13579 wrote:
What the hell is a "psych", and how do you know that something has a "psych" just by looking at it?

https://saboteur365.files.wordpress.com...

One of the reasons trilobites are loved so much by Zoologists and Palentoligsts is that they are one of the most diverse preserved groups. This is often due their hard shell and the fact that they spent most of their lives underwater, so could be easily buried by sediments. They existed over 520 MYA and have a bit over 20,000 described species (Likely to be more). Naturally, all trilobite species vary, but their basic body plan is similar in all. They have a cephalon (Essentially a head, think cephalisation), thorax and pygidium. It is believed that trilobites were a mix of scavengers and predators, but of course there were some particle filter feeders (Trilobites were some of the first arthropods, what could you expect?). "Scars" can be found on some trilobite shells, these would remain because it would take several moults (Arthropods moult their shells) to completely heal the wound, hence why "Scars" can be found on some fossils. Because of their (Relative) abundunce, trilobites are often use in biostratigraphy. A common misconception is that Trilobites are the ancestor of notable modern arthropods such as spiders, this is not correct, the Trilobites sister clade "Chelicerate" clade is actually the ancestor group of the spiders.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Psychology is pure pseudoscience, like astrology! Trying to predict behavior with imaginary unfalsifiable concepts is like predicting behavior by observing star alignments!

I like trilobites.
Meh!
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 8:54:25 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 8:58:10 AM, Axonly wrote:
The Myers Briggs test is considered pseudoscience by most personality psychologists, so why is it still used so often by schools and businesses?
Worse science but better engineering. :)

It's easy to use, Ax, and partially effective. The partial efficacy comes about because there's a fair correlation with the Five Factor Model [https://en.wikipedia.org...] (also known as the "Big Five"), which has superseded MBTI in psychology. [http://www.sciencedirect.com...]

But MBTI's ease of use arises because it also comes with a conveniently layered structure [https://en.wikipedia.org...], archetypes [https://en.wikipedia.org...] and specific, business and developmental predictions that integrate well with other human knowledge, and are still more right than random chance. Since good managers and educators tend not to use MBTI alone anyway, a predictive model that's only partially accurate can nevertheless be more attractive if it's more usable day-to-day.

As an example, Mrs Draba is a trained psychologist and former research scientist. She knows MBTI weaknesses, and understands the Big Five, yet still uses MBTI in business because it's easier to plan with and advise clients with.

Perhaps over time, Big Five will build the necessary decision-engineering to make it equally usable, at which point managers and educators will be tempted to switch. But so far, from what I've seen MBTI has been winning on usability in many applications, despite its limitations in accuracy and stability.

I hope that may be of interest. :)