Psychology and Human Behavior
The debate on whether psychology is science has been in existence for a long time. Answering the question with a ‘yes or no answer’ has been failing as people always have explanations for doing concerning the subject. Most psychologists are, however, for the point that psychology is a science. The claim that psychology is science cannot be easily refuted because psychology is concerned with several complex matters that are similar to science. Psychology has several values and aspects that are similar to science and has, in most cases, erased the doubt that the field is a science. Besides, the definition of psychology for starters is done based on science.
Additionally, the history of psychology is associated with scientific procedures that worked together to come up with the psychology field. Psychologists have therefore been brought up with the mentality that they are scientists and thus have been keen to maintain the aspect of science in psychology. Generally, academic psychology has been appearing to be a scientific discipline, and the most of psychology in the academy is scientific, and psychologists have continued to behave like scientists and their methods of answering questions have continued to rely on scientific methods.
Psychology is a science and therefore uses an empirical approach to learn about human behavior. Human behavior is always a complicated issue to learn about because people change with time and are sometimes able to change certain behaviors due to circumstances (Watkins, 2017). Psychology uses the empirical approach to learn about human behavior, affect, and cognition successfully. The human mind is the most useful organ in academic psychology and acts in unison with the body to ensure a successful passing of knowledge. Generally, psychology considers all the components of the mind to pass knowledge concerning human behavior, affect, and cognition. Generally, scientific techniques set the stage for an empirical approach, and psychology uses scientific methods to fit into the empirical approach. However, the arguments passed against the claim that psychology should not be treated as science have always set alternatives to replace the empirical approach to psychology.
Pseudoscientific approaches have always been confused with scientific approaches in psychology. The nature of pseudoscientific approaches is that the approaches appear to be scientific at first glance only to turn out different later. Human behavior has been identified using pseudoscientific approaches that do not require scientific interpretation, and therefore, the confusion between science and pseudoscience has been growing strong and strong. Several approaches have been viewed classified as pseudoscientific approaches because of several factors. In a bid to classify an approach as pseudoscientific requires a clear interpretation of the factors. First, the approach must be in a position to have adherents who claim or believe that the approach is scientific. Then, the approach should lack one or more features of science so that it is not classified as scientific. Generally, pseudoscientific approaches depend on the claim and beliefs by the adherents to hold.
Pseudoscience appears in several forms in the study of human behavior. Several examples are used to show the application of pseudoscience in daily lives. One of the examples of pseudoscientific approaches is body language where individuals have different ways of using their bodies to each other (Thyer & Pignotti, 2016). Most people believe that a scientific explanation is needed to explain how body language operates, although the whole process is not scientific hence a pseudoscience. Dianetics is also an example of a pseudoscientific approach that is used to cure mental disorders. Science is viewed as the basis of healing processes, although dianetics does not involve any scientific methods. Also, handwriting analysis qualifies as a pseudoscientific approach because of the belief held by adherents. Individuals’ handwriting styles are analyzed to bring out the personalities held by different people, and science is not necessarily required.
Scientific and non-scientific methods have been employed in several occasions to understand human behavior. However, both scientific and scientific approaches have limitations that lead to questions that may remain unanswered with proper understanding (Oden, 2017). First, scientific approaches are based on hypotheses that have to be testable. If the hypotheses fail, the method is seen as invalid, and the procedure has to be repeated. Also, scientific methods are not based on value evidence, and thus, several questions remain unanswered. The lack of values to base arguments on lowers the authenticity of scientific approaches. On the other side, nonscientific methods have more limitations because of the theories that are used as supporting evidence. Nonscientific methods rely on beliefs that may constantly require proofs and may fail to be authentic.
In sum, the debate on whether psychology is science has been in existence although most psychologists have decided to treat the field as a science. Human behavior is a complex subject that requires psychology to work extra hard to understand. Both scientific and non-scientific methods are prone to limitations that cause challenges to the psychology field in general.
References
Oden, M. S. (2017). Understanding human behavior.
Thyer, B. A., & Pignotti, M. (2016). The problem of pseudoscience in social work continuing education. Journal of Social Work Education, 52(2), 136-146.
Watkins, H. M. (2017). System Justification in Social Psychology? A Survey of Responses to the Replicability Debate in Psychology.