Is psychology a science?

[Inevitable Droid]

A discussion on another thread put me in mind of this.  On one of my favorite TV shows, Bones, one of the two main characters, Doctor Temperance Brennan - one of my favorite cinematic creations of all time, a heroine of empiricism and logic, two of my favorite things - is of the strong opinion that psychology isn't a science.  Do you agree or disagree?  Why?

[Tank]

Yes it is. All I will say is that saying such a thing in close proximity to my wife (who is a psychologist with a number of books and papers to her name) results in a spectacular but to-date a non-lethal rebuttal.  

Psychology uses the scientific method but the nature of the subject matter limits its ability to carry out what some people would consider 'science' in it's fullest possible sense. It is, as far as it can be, a fully scientific discipline. The nature of the subject limits its absolute efficacy.

[Will]

Psychology is a science. It utilizes the scientific method, peer review, and vigorous testing.

[Event_Horizon]

I had an entire class on the history and future of psychology when I was an undergrad. The way I see it, and this is only what I took away from it (disclaimer), psychology is split into a continuum with a camp on either side. There are the scientific psychologists that follow specific research methods like any other science, submitting their papers to peer review and such. They follow the scientific method, have null hypotheses, statistical values, etc etc. The other camp, to me at least, are people who endorse past psychology that was influenced by mysticism and very unscientific hypotheses. Jung and Freud, as far as the science psychologists are concerned, are nothing more than relics, a way to point backwards and say "that is our history". However there are a few who still accept their theories, and many other theories of personality that aren't scientifically based. Some are more conducive to the scientific method, others are simply speculation from a hundred years ago. The scientists like to show these theories to give credit and context to the field they work in, but pseudoscientists like to take the ideas from early psychology, that any scientific psychologist would regard as a historical remnant. The media also seems to portray psychology unscientifically as a useful but inaccurate shorthand.

[Tom62]

I don't think it is a science [yet]. We still don't know enough of how the brain works and how to treat an illness of the brain.

[OldGit]

As far as I can see, Psychology is doing its best to be a science, despite the difficult nature of its territory.  Psychiatry, on the other hand, seems not yet even to approach being a coherent discipline.

[Byronazriel]

From what I can tell, it seems to still be in its alchemy stage. It has the general idea, but it's a field in dire need of pioneering.

[Inevitable Droid]

It occurrs to me that psychology, having one day developed to such a level that it was universally conceded to be a science, might be a frightening prospect.  After all, what would it need to be able to do to merit such a designation?  Presumably it would need to have achieved a complete mapping of the brain and its functions, such that, with monitoring devices that would actually exist, experts could literally, in the most robust sense, read a person's mind, and then could predict what the mind would do next, and exert control over the possibilities.  Imagine these experts as malevolent and perhaps some fear would be justified.

[Sophus]

I'll cast my vote in favor with Will and Tank. It's a science.

[Byronazriel]

People do that now, they're called cult leaders.

[dloubet]

It identifies and categorizes consistencies in nature so that we are able to claim knowledge of those things. Yeah, it's a science.

[Ultima22689]

It occurrs to me that psychology, having one day developed to such a level that it was universally conceded to be a science, might be a frightening prospect.  After all, what would it need to be able to do to merit such a designation?  Presumably it would need to have achieved a complete mapping of the brain and its functions, such that, with monitoring devices that would actually exist, experts could literally, in the most robust sense, read a person's mind, and then could predict what the mind would do next, and exert control over the possibilities.  Imagine these experts as malevolent and perhaps some fear would be justified.

This will be done in a decade or two, i'm sure psychology will shake off it's stigma then, all sciences were at this point in history.