Hurry Up! Get 15% Please upload the order before 20th February, 2019. T&C applied Order now !
review
Back to Samples

Critical Thinking | A Report on "Psychology Is A Science"

Introduction

If someone is being recognized as the psychologist or he/ she may show any interest on psychology-related topics, therefore the person has to face another question regarding whether psychology should be considered as science or not. The debate is quite prominent since the inception of psychology in the second half of 19th century has been declared as the ‘dirty little science’. It can be said that this debate should be continued and it is very well known to the scholars of this field too. However, this debate should be discussed ones again in this report as most of the scholars, as well as psychologists, are deeply keen to get the answer. Some basic definitions of both the science and psychology have been provided here to maintain the clarity of communication.

Defining Science and the Critical Elements of It

 

 

h century has been declared as the ‘dirty little science’. It can be said that this debate should be continued and it is very well known to the scholars of this field too. However, this debate should be discussed ones again in this report as most of the scholars, as well as psychologists, are deeply keen to get the answer. Some basic definitions of both the science and psychology have been provided here to maintain the clarity of communication.

Defining Science and the Critical Elements of It

 

 

Figure 1: Definition and Key Elements of Science

(Source:Varela, Thompson & Rosch, 2017)

Before critically analyse the logic for which psychology can be considered as science, it is more necessary to understand the definition of science. According to Withers (2017), science can be defined as the application as well as the pursuit of knowledge application. Other than that, it can be defined further as the understanding of the social and natural world which usually follow a systematic methodology by evidence. On the other hand, Shay &Wernick (2017) have further discussed that science refers to the knowledge acquiring system that can be made by experimentation as well as observation. This observation and evidence are needed to explain and describe the natural phenomena. 

Therefore, it can be said that science needs evidence and observation. Rather it is better to say that logical statement along with the proofs is needed to establish the scientific facts. No abrupt and illogical statements or information would be considered. The above mentioned definitions are solid, but some more specification is needed. That is why, Hand, Murray & Garvin (2017) have pointed out four major elements which are the key ingredients of science. They are the scientific mindset, scientific method, knowledge system and rhetorical label of science. First three elements are highly straightforward whereas the fourth one is mostly relevant for this type of debate. It is better to say that these components can provide a deep understanding regarding the topic of debate.

As stated by Paul et al. (2017), scientific mindset includes a huge set of assumption regarding complexity as well as casualty. The observer may want to know in which way the world may work. In a technical world. This activity can be called as scientific epistemology from the technical aspect. If a person starts thinking scientifically, therefore the cause-effect circle should be mentioned. The people with scientific mindset believe that each of the function in the world has a specific reason to happen. Other than that, Staudtet al. (2017) have discussed that if science has been considered as a method only, therefore it should not be as valuable.

Gregg Henriques

Figure 2: Science Cycle for Knowledge Development

(Source:Varela, Thompson & Rosch, 2017)

While discussing the process of science cycle, some factors should be mentioned. They are explaining, predicting and observing. It focuses on the system based on which the entire world use to work. Besides that, it must be said that science has more rhetorical value in this culture. Varela, Thompson & Rosch (2017) have opined that if something is being considered as science, therefore respect to the received knowledge should be shown. Finally, a contradictory statement can be given that is the attitudes of scientists towards the psychologists are not the reflection of their snobbishness. It is more about their frustration.

Defining Psychology as a Science

According to Zavershneva (2017), psychology can be defined as the study that focuses on the human mind as well as its functionalities. However, the academic psychology has been suggested in that case. The professionals of academic psychology would talk as well as analyse the problems of people. They are mainly responsible for identifying the way by which these problems can be resolved. Neiva, Torres &Mendonça (2017)have stated that psychology acts as science in several ways. Even, it has also noted that a group of psychologists use to call it as science for the beginners.

Image result for human psychology

Figure 3: Different Behaviors considered under Psychology

(Source:Shapiro & Carlson, 2017)

The above-depicted picture is showing different behaviours of the human being, and all of them are the concern of a psychologist. For example. Memory loss is a common problem which influences people to meet a psychologist. Especially the aged people use to suffer from it. Other than that, memory loss can indicate some crucial diseases like Alzheimer as well.

On the flip side, the academic psychologists have adopted the scientific mindset too especially when the scientific method has been implemented. It has employed the method of science which includes measurement, systematic observation, and hypothesis testing and so on (Buss, 2015). All of them help the psychologists to understand the conscious experience of human being. Other than that, it has also been observed the training in academic psychology often can be defined by the training in scientific method.

Figure 4: Scientific Methods in Psychology

(Source:Valsiner, 2017)

Finally, it can be said that the academic psychology often looks like the scientific discipline and it mostly follows the scientific method to respond to the questions. Therefore, from this aspect, it can be considered as much similar subjects.

The Reason for what Psychology can be failed to be considered as Science

On the other hand, while considering it from a sceptic set of mine, different reasons can be identified which indicate that psychology cannot be a science. Even, no scientific mindset can be found there. Zavershneva (2017) has opined that psychology is unsuccessful in producing the cumulative knowledge body. Some of the great scholars like Kenneth Gergen has tried to adopt knowledge in this regard. However, the method was so impressive but temporary, socially depended and contextual. Even, it has been washed out if a new trend has occurred. Therefore, no fundamental theory can be developed. On the other hand, Neiva, Torres & Mendonça (2017) havefocused on the technical aspect, and this field has been named as pre-pragmatic. It indicates that psychology is suffering from lack of export agreements. Therefore, it cannot explain as well as describe itself properly. 

Gregg Henriques

Figure 5: Existing Level of Psychology

(Source:Valsiner, 2017)

A big confusion is there about to understand the exact level of psychology. Shapiro & Carlson (2017) have discussed that the mainstream psychologists should understand that the basic issues of psychology usually exist at the specific level of wisdom and knowledge. The levels of information and data are not related to psychology.

Conclusion

Lastly, it can be said that if focusing on the application of scientific method, then psychology must be approved as a science. However, on the other side, the work process of psychology cannot be aligned with physics, chemistry or bioscience. Therefore, psychology cannot be considered as a science in this aspect.