Mike, Since I don't subscribe to any of the views you have erroneously ascribed to me, I'm not much inclined to debate the matter with you. On the issues of definition in science, see Carl Hempel.
Chris --- Christopher D Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M6C 1G4 Canada [email protected] On Dec 4, 2010, at 3:22 PM, "Mike Palij" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 04 Dec 2010 10:15:22 -0800, Christopher D. Green wrote: >> Honestly, Mike. Are you this pedantic, humorless, and self-important in >> real life, or only on the TIPS list? > > No. I'm *more* pedantic, etc. You should read me on the > Psychteacher list! :-) > > See, I run rings around you logically! (10 points for source). > >> Just a touch of humility would probably do wonders for psychology's >> reputation, instead of the brittle, paranoid defensiveness that is >> all-too-commonly its public face. > > So, does this mean you're not going to provide a definition for science, > just like I couldn't get a definition of "learning" out of you a while back? > > *sigh* Let me see, either your remark is in support of Prof Smith > comments (that psychology's claim to be a science appears to be > undeserved, that is has does not have the same status of discipline > as physics, chemistry, biology, etc.,) and that psychology's claims to > be a science is just an example of its belief in its own press/hype, or > your comments are a non sequitur. > > So which is it? > > -Mike Palij > New York University > [email protected] > > > P.S. Oh, intercourse the penguin! ;-) > > ========================== > > > Mike Palij wrote: >> On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 18:21:25 -0800, Christopher Green wrote: >> >>> In show business, this is referred to as the problem of believing one's own >>> press. >>> >> >> Please explain yourself. It would help if you provided a definition for >> science and then identify how all activities covered by psychology >> fail to meet that definition (I'm particularly interested in why you >> don't think cognitive neuropsychology, mathematical psychology, >> and psychophysics fail to meet basic criteria for being a science). >> If you please, you can also identify/explain what areas of the >> traditional sciences (i.e., physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) fail to >> your critieria. >> > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd0da&n=T&l=tips&o=6967 > or send a blank email to > leave-6967-13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6973 or send a blank email to leave-6973-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
