[tinktank]

Where does she say they are scientific observations?

The dictionary definition of "observe" is to notice or perceive (something) and register it as being significant.

By that definition the word observation in the title and text is completely legitimate and used correctly.

[lapcat]

Where did I say that the word "observation" was inappropriate? I'm certainly not denying that the author observed a bunch of people at weddings. My criticism is that these observations are insufficient to read accurately "into the hearts and minds of strangers".

[antonchekhov]

Then what did your second sentence ["These are not scientific observations in any sense. What does the author do to confirm or refute her psychological theories about others?"] intend?

> She's very good at telling stories, but these stories feel like fiction, not hard fact.

There was no claim of objective fact. This is a Substack piece, not a peer-reviewed submission to "Nature" journal.

[lapcat]

> This is a Substack piece, not a peer-reviewed submission to "Nature" journal.

Are you suggesting that we can't criticize the crap people say on Substack?