Validity on Psychological Experiments

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

[size=200]Validity on Psychological Experiments[/size]
A General Analyse and Basic Theory

[size=50]By Wong Ka Kit, Teru
Hong Kong, China
Published on 14th July, 2009[/size]

The phenomenon which accounted for the occurrences of the psychological/metal disorders can be observed from all species of animals rather than living organism(s)/creatures [which we usually refer to animal(s)] with (a) relatively high level(s) intelligences/wisdoms. All animals/living organism(s) with intelligences/wisdoms must consisted of a biological/physical structure which we usually described it/them as “brain(s)” or “mind(s)”. The function(s) of the mind(s)/brain(s) is equivalent to (a) computer chip(s) in (a) computer(s) theoretically. Living organisms are in the same level of Lives under the “Theory of Similarities of Lives”. With reference to typical/normal/usual biological classification(s), living organism(s) is/are divided into different hierarchies. According to this theory, the level(s) of live(s) should not be depended on the levels of intelligences/wisdoms but its/their physical presences. The breakthrough comes here. The psychological/mental disorder(s)/behaviour(s) is/are not consequence(s)/symptom(s) of abnormal way(s) of thinking or we named it after (a) “thought(s)”. At the meanwhile, the psychological disorder may not “sorely/only” or “directly” led by the releases(s) of certain specific chemical substance(s) inside brain(s) as the result(s) of researches which has/have been revealed in previous experiment(s). At the meanwhile, the theory of “Similarities of Lives” cannot be examined with the control experiment(s) which aimed at testing the theory through psychological experiment(s) on various living organisms. There will not be more than one object which is/are capable of satisfying all requirement(s) in a simple hypothesis that “All Objects must be equal”. The result(s) of the experiment will NEVER be valid. The direction of the psychological therapies which put the focus on the “thinking” of human beings has “crossed/contradicted/reversed” to/against/with the “fundamental/typical/usual” biological categorization(s). The pyramid-like structure of the classification of living organism(s) which is/are “commonly/usually/always” “recognized/approved/adopted” by psychologists/psychological “therapists/researchers” classified by the level(s) of intelligences is incorrect with regards to the “direction(s)/usage(s)/recognition(s)” adopted by the psychological “therapists/researchers” in the experiment(s). No matter the “Theory of Similarities of Lives” is valid or not, every psychological experiment which relied any parts on the evaluation on “Object(s)” is all INVALID.

I am sharing my own opinions on the above article.
Please kindly discuss the adversity of the theory above and comment on it if possible.
Thanks in advance.

2

what/where is this “intelligence-based” pyramid of categorization for life that you are referring to here?

3

The “Object(s)” as all psychologist(s) have commonly agreed is/are living organism(s) that have a minimum degree of interlligences. It/They do(es) not refer to Mammals only. Please be noted that this pyramid varies from time to time, but its fluctation(s) has/have no effect(s) on my argument. The main point is the Control Experiment and the selection(s) of “object(s)”. As you know, the “subject(s)” has/have always being controlled by the researcher(s), but not for object(s).

Psychological Therapies refer to a wide range of experiment(s) conducted on different individual. In case, it means all experiments on Pshychological Therapies are INVALID. I have studied Behaviour Science myself as a selective course, but I don’t think their experiment(s) are valid according to the rule of the condition(s) required by the common scientisifc researches. By the way, I have no offenses on psychology.

It ended with the conditions of experiments. The control on the “objects” during the process undertaking.
It has been terminated by the unequal/unsufficient information of the experiments itself.

Thank you very much for sharing.

The psychological experiments have to be conducted by suitable control on objects as well, not only the subject. This theory applied on the psychological therapy will mean an end to it. Check if this theory is valid.

4

to be honest, i have no idea wtf youre saying.

5

With regards to your question above, I think you may figure out a hint in the article below.
I hope it may help you to find out a clue on what I am talking about ont the top.

Thank you very much.

[size=200]Use of Animal(s) in Psychological Experiment(s)[/size]
A Declaration of an Enlightenment Movement

[size=50]By Wong Ka Kit, Teru
Hong Kong, China
Published on 15 July 2009[/size]

The application of psychological experiments on various types of animals is abusing the rights and lives of living things. Living things are in the same level of lives as all of us. The Termination of psychological therapies has marked a new era of enlightenment and the respect to the animals’ rights. Scientists should stop using animals in their experiments. I have spotted the abusive behaviours of psychologists on massive uses and killings of animals. According to my article, “Validity on Psychological Experiments” is a breakthrough in psychology. The experiment of psychological therapies is in a wrong direction and has to be stopped immediately. United Nations should start investigation on all abusive behaviours done by all psychological experiment in the world. The Declaration of Human Rights can also be applied to all living thing(s) and animal(s) with reference to the Charter. The abusive behaviours of the psychologists are harming the future development of the subject itself. My article is a pre-warning to those psychologists who abused their power during experiments. The use of “subject(s)” and “object(s)” on human cannot be tolerated and must have to be stopped. With the announcement of the invalidity of the psychological therapies in the article “Validity on Psychological Experiments”, psychology comes to a new era of more useful and applicable experiments.

6

thats not an “article”, its just some assertions you made without giving any reasons for them or citing any evidence or real studies done to back it up.

you may not like experimentation on animals, but that doesnt mean that those experiments are not valid or useful. consider all the useful knowledge we have gained on drugs testing on mice alone. there are countless animal experiments thats have given us accurate knowledge of the effects of treatments and drugs. just because you dont like them, doesnt mean that they are “invalid”… you need to provide some EVIDENCE or at the least a REASON WHY you think that “psychological experiments are invalid”, considering that the massive amount of clinical data and evidence suggests otherwise.

7

The reason account for my “assertion(s)” (or it is a factual explanation to the validity of psychological experiment) is that “No objects are Completely equal”.

It is not a problem of animal rights only, but the validity of the experiment(s). A Least a reason for “psychological experiments are invalid” can be given in the hypothesus of every experiment. Please be noted that “object(s)” have to be equal in order to get a valid result.

Thank you very much.

8

for objects beings equal, statistically all relevant objects (data points) are equal as statistical data. psychological experiments are based on observable results and predictability, as well as establishing correlations. p=0.05 is usually sufficient to indicates significance.

so basically, youre wrong.

thank you very much.

9

I am glad that we still have ACADEMIC FREEDOM in Standford.

p=0.05 h=0.05 PH=0.1

Normally, you are right.

Thank you for your reply.

10

Below is an example showing the validity of psychological hypothesus.

[size=150]Expression resides in perceptual qualities of the stimulus pattern[/size]
BY Rudolf Arnheim

In achieving great quantifying skills we have seriously damaged our ability to focus upon the qualities of our surroundings and the effects of those qualities upon our worldview. With a little thought we can readily recognize that “we do not do justice to what we see by describing it only with measurements of size, shape, wavelength, or speed. The dynamic qualities of shapes and events have proved to be an inseparable aspect of all visual experience.”

When we consciously open our eyes to the dynamic qualities conveyed by any object we will inevitably see these objects as carrying expressive meaning. “All perceptual qualities have generality. We see redness, smallness, remoteness, swiftness, embodied in individual examples, but conveying a kind of experience, rather than a uniquely particular one…The dynamic differences between Romanesque and Gothic architecture translate themselves automatically into states of mind characterizing the corresponding cultural periods.”

Arnheim defines “expression as modes of organic or inorganic behavior displayed in the dynamic appearance of perceptual objects or events.

In a narrow sense expression is said to exist only in confluence with mind wherein facial muscles give rise to structures that relate to what is going on in mind. In this narrow view non animate materials have expression only in a figurative sense.

Theodore Lipps’ “theory of empathy” was developed to explain how we find expression emanating from our vision of inanimate objects. When I see the columns of a temple I feel the physical forces sustained by that column because of my past experience. I project my stress feeling onto the columns. I have the capacity to project such things as “my pride, my courage, my stubbornness, my lightness, my playful assuredness, my tranquil compliance. Only thus my empathy with regard to nature becomes truly aesthetic empathy…expression resides in perceptual qualities of the stimulus pattern

“One aspect of the wisdom that belongs to a genuine culture is the constant awareness of the symbolic meaning expressed in a concrete happening, the sensing of the universal in the particular…There are people who cannot swallow because there is something in their lives they “cannot swallow” or whom an unconscious sense of guilt compels to spend hours every day on washing and cleaning.”

All perceptual, as well as expression, qualities have generality. This is why it is correct to say such things as Picasso’s picture can symbolizes gentleness or that Michelangelo’s Creation of Man, on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, is generally understood to be a symbol of Genesis.

Quotes from Art and Visual Perception: Psychology of the Creative Eye by Rudolf Arnheim

“Rudolf Arnheim”
The past has passed.

  1. To find out which part of the brain is responsible for interprete the incoming message or images is not the key.

  2. The reasons account for such perceptions can be individual experiences that make himself recall the memory such as joy. The situation that “cannot swallow” can be explained by his interpretation above, but not for washing hands. If such kind of actions is a habit or repeated actions daily, its reasons must not be experiences in the past. The reason account for repeated actions must not be because of fears. Fear of being unclean is completely different from the direct reaction generated by fear at the first place.

  3. Ended, like ‘Solution to “Infinity” in Mathematics’.

God Bless.

Teru