This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy: Mind Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophy of mind

I've reverted the page. It is unclear as to what exactly "psychobabbble" means, and why what was posted on the page counts as "psychobabbble", and why "psychobabble" should not be on a page about mental properties. Care to clarify?

I'm going to add the "weasel" banner on this page. Here are a few reasons why.

• It is claimed that mental properties are studied by sciences and parasciences. Then it is claimed that "philosophy of mind", which is neither science nor parascience, also studies mental properties.
• The article states that the third approach is the "most universal research." I believe this shows a clear bias.
• Undue emphasis is placed on systemics. Mental properties have been the subject of study by many other disciplines for a lot longer than systemics has been around.

I can provide more reasons - feel free to ask me - but I believe these to be sufficient. I do intend to help improve this article, so please do not see this as a "hit and run." D15724C710N (talk • contribs) 07:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the wording which will address the concerns above and also the authors original intention is: "The third is the most recent area of research". Then I propose that the weasel-wording dispute tag can be removed. Good luck to all those intending to improve the article - surely just one REF can be found?! Mediation4u (talk) 08:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC) ^{editing is fun}[reply]

Improved the article. Several days allowed for reply, so going ahead with proposal above, so Weasel words removed / reworded in article. and tag removed.

Good luck to all those intending to improve the article - surely just one REF can be found on google?! Mediation4u (talk) 07:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC) ^{editing is fun}[reply]