Is Psychology a 'weak' subject at A level and Degree level?

Don't agree at all.

The study of behaviour and 'the mind' aka Psychology, is not the reason for our development by a long stretch. The mind itself is, yes, but the study of the mind, no.

This thread comes up quite a lot and people always say that Oxbridge don't like it, but I'd beg to differ. A publication by Cambridge [here] says it might be suitable for some courses. And if anecdotal evidence is anything to go by, they based my offer on Maths, FMaths and Psychology (when they could have chosen French instead of or as well as Psychology).

Yey i've got godspeed on my side

Everyone seemed to be saying that they agreed with this nonsense for some reason...

i can see how a better knowledge of things like memory and mental illness have been very beneficial, but not integral to our development.

Of course the study of Psychology is not needed for our development. I believe we can definitely improve our development through Psychology, for example, I use memory techniques like the method of loci that have really helped me with my exams.

I find it an interesting subject that does indeed offer the potential to develop strong skills e.g. research/analysis - but a few friends read Psychology and found it to be a dead end and my sister elected not to pursue it having initially been very interested but then having conducted a fair bit of research into opportunities aye

Neither really contribute to maths so I doubt they really cared.

I find it an interesting subject that does indeed offer the potential to develop strong skills e.g. research/analysis - but a few friends read Psychology and found it to be a dead end and my sister elected not to pursue it having initially been very interested but then having conducted a fair bit of research into opportunities aye

wut.

Behaviourism is based on behaviorism. The entire field of Psychology is not. I have no idea why you think this. Open a textbook and you'll find that 95% of the content is not behaviourism.

Radical behaviourism is not neccesarily discredited, but is instead largely not accepted as arguably the approaches of cognitive psychology are much more able to explain human behaviour. I suspect this is the field that you are referring to. You will struggle to find a psychologist that subscribes to this view. They're a dying breed.

Overall, however, the core aspects of behaviourism are empirically tried and tested and are heavily engrained in all walks of life. Learning by association and reinforcement is everywhere and is essentially the cornerstone of all societies. These principals are far from discredited. Probably one of the most empirically validated concepts in psychology if anything. These two forms of learning are essentially how learning in the nervous system is represented.

Have you not heard about Chomsky's destruction of Skinner?

Please elaborate!

I think its just average, although I have seen that Cambridge consider it to be a weak A level

Flawed as in still based on Skinner's behaviourism which is widely discredited.

Feel free to elaborate.

They consider mos things "weak", and every subject you do is weak if done at a state school

I have no formal education in psychology but that doesn't mean I don't know its bull****.

So you read one critique on a very small area of psychology, and also you remember that many years ago the now stringent rules on the welfare of those taking part in experiments were non-existent, and you come to such a damning and certain conclusion? I would say you lack even a basic understanding of the subject, believing yourself worthy enough to criticize a whole field of science based on the words of one man (directed to a very tiny element of the subject) and try and throw in some moralistic crap to add the 'piece de resistance' to the pseudo-intellectual **** you have just come out with?

I think its just average, although I have seen that Cambridge consider it to be a weak A level