... and of course we can point to the overall success of the enterprise as evidence that not thinking too deeply works. At least Physics, Chemistry and Biology can.
-
-
Replying to @tom_hartley @o_guest
... But those disciplines have well developed theories. Psychology has not really got that far, yet. Understandable for the first 100 years, not so much now.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @tom_hartley
I'm not convinced biology has better theories than psychology to be honest.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest
Ha! Well, you know - DNA, RNA, genes, selection etc. Admittedly many of these feel like established empirical facts already, but they started as theories. I struggle to think of comparable ideas in Psychology.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @tom_hartley
If "DNA" is a good example in your opinion of a theory what stops "memory" from being a good one, or "neurons" or "learning"? Asking because I genuinely don't think psych is that bad for theories given these comparisons, but we can improve a lot.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
First, you have a point - and there is some sophistication about psychological ideas about memory. But I think the level of detail about mechanisms like e.g., protein transcription (which I am getting at with the DNA shorthand) are much more advanced...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tom_hartley
This is interesting because I think we might disagree on what a theory is. Or what a good theory is. It's kind of cool.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
Well, the last thing I want is another disagreement, but yes - I think it's perfectly sensible for scientists to have different objectives, goals, evaluative criteria in terms of theory.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tom_hartley @o_guest
In fact (or rather IMO) one thing modellers often bring to the table is the understanding (often implicit) that the scope and level of analysis chosen are important in determining progress.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tom_hartley
Without wanting to say that you and I are perfect, a paragon of dialogue and "go us", we are doing a good job of communicating. And disagreeing the level of where the discussion is and agreeing on what we may differ on... That's unusual.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It worries me it's not more common on academic/science twitter. But I do get why.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.