[luffapi]

It’s the study of the “mind” (not brain). It’s very basis is the study of a pseudo-religious phenomenon. Neuroscience is real science because it studies the brain not the artificial and archaic concept of the mind.

There can be personal value in studying psychology. It’s just not science, it’s fictional.

[dash2]

How does this critique apply, e.g. to Jonathan Haidt's work on moral foundations? Or, if you want something more rigorous, to prospect theory and other decision theorists' attempts to build simple tractable models of decision-making?

[disgruntledphd2]

> It’s the study of the “mind” (not brain). It’s very basis is the study of a pseudo-religious phenomenon

So you don't believe in the existence of qualia?

That's a pretty strong philosophical position.