Talk:Doctor Jung's Remedies and Potions

Pseudoscience?
Can we really call psychoanalysis a pseudoscience? Perhaps the note should be reworded. --RoyHarmon 05:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Psychoanalysis is not a pseudoscience. Can someone change the article please? Enoxon 14:52, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is according to the authorities on science, and those people can't even agree on if science is real. That's not really the question however. Not this wiki's job to deal with. We are only interested in so far it relects on the game. And making Jung a litteral snake oil salesman is the sort of reference that is only obviously after you know about it. That's the info we need to retain. If you want to word it in a fuzzier way that would make you happier, that's fine as long as the info that is relevant for readers of the wiki is retained. Backsword 14:21, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'm not trying to get into an argument here, but psychoanalysis is not a pseudoscience. I've been studying it in college for some time now, so I've done my homework, searched for it, and found a big argument going on in the scientific community about what constitutes science or not. Some scientists regard it as a pseudoscience. Some do not. I'm not going to change it, but I would at least like some proof of how it doesn't constitute science according to "the authorities on science". Also, if we are only interested in how it reflects on the game, shouldn't we try to remove things that might be offensive to some people (like Psychoanalytic enthusiasts)? Enoxon 09:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've only understood part of your comment just now. Maybe because English isn't my main language. I'll try to find a way for it to retain it's original meaning and not be considered offensive. Thanks for the input. Enoxon 10:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)