yeshe did... encouragement of empiricism and scientific method among them, two things which he ignored in the majority of his work...
but he told a lot of lies that are still perpetrated by psychoanalysts ('psychologists' in TV terminology) today. He was a fraud, never had a sample to base his hypotheses on, and just made it up as he went along, inventing support from what he had found with his few patients.
He's a dick, and should not be so widely accepted as a symbol of psychology as he is. Psychology is a lot more than just some old arrogant cunt pretending he knows everything about you, because your personality is basically the same as everyone else's. Pish. Wrong. Pish.
(but he told a lot of lies that are still perpetrated by psychoanalysts ('psychologists' in TV terminology) today. He was a fraud, never had a sample to base his hypotheses on, and just made it up as he went along, inventing support from what he had found with his few patients.
He's a dick, and should not be so widely accepted as a symbol of psychology as he is. Psychology is a lot more than just some old arrogant cunt pretending he knows everything about you, because your personality is basically the same as everyone else's. Pish. Wrong. Pish.
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 15:15,
archived)
see he can't explain.......he's been dumbfounded by SCIENCE!! Just Flange,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 15:20,
archived)
But the point is that it was in reaction to him that truly empirical psychological research took offBefore Freud, the closest psychologists came to science was introspective research and some basic physiological tests, so it's not as if he just rejected scientific enquiry, it simply wasn't developed in the psychological field at that point.
I'm by no means saying that he was right, and no psychological therapist worth their salt still uses Freudian psychoanalysis (though some psychiatrists do, but the less said about them the better). Nevertheless, his ideas about attachment, formative experiences (esp. in the development of mental illness), the unconscious etc HAVE been taken up and tested empirically.
He still suggested some important things, and deserves to be remembered as an important stage in the development of psychology.
Edit: Argh! Why am I trying to make a point on the internet?
(I'm by no means saying that he was right, and no psychological therapist worth their salt still uses Freudian psychoanalysis (though some psychiatrists do, but the less said about them the better). Nevertheless, his ideas about attachment, formative experiences (esp. in the development of mental illness), the unconscious etc HAVE been taken up and tested empirically.
He still suggested some important things, and deserves to be remembered as an important stage in the development of psychology.
Edit: Argh! Why am I trying to make a point on the internet?
Fishcat Difficult difficult lemon difficult.,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 15:27,
archived)
hahah RE your edit, i often find myself wondering the same thing. depressing eh? Just Flange,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 15:43,
archived)
I agreehe shouldn't be deleted from history, and it could be argued that he did set the basis for the use of scientific method in psychology, although he didn't attempt to practice it, and you rightly say that no-one else did either until Eysenck (perhaps not, it's a while since I took interest in the beginnings of psychology as a science)
Attachment and formative experience are certainly still important in developmental psychology, but I don't really want to credit Freud with the finding of them, as he simply published his opinions and ideas on them, with no relevant grounding at the time... as a cognitive neurscientist/psychologist myself, published opinions aren't worth a thing, in fact, it's probably just jealousy on my part, I'd love to publish my ideas on subjects without having to back it up with results.
But yes, ok, Freud in a theoretical, not to be taken too seriously without figures, sense, was important in encouraging empirical research. The problem is that the "shrink", psychoanalysis or psychiatrist culture so popular in america (especially with the rich) and the increase in these pretend psychologist on TV in the UK, rides on the back of fraudulent claims at best. Even Freud admitted that his rates of helping mentally ill people through psychoanalysis were below chance, and I continue to believe that wish-washy talk about personality, often, if not, always, over-simplifies brain function.
(Attachment and formative experience are certainly still important in developmental psychology, but I don't really want to credit Freud with the finding of them, as he simply published his opinions and ideas on them, with no relevant grounding at the time... as a cognitive neurscientist/psychologist myself, published opinions aren't worth a thing, in fact, it's probably just jealousy on my part, I'd love to publish my ideas on subjects without having to back it up with results.
But yes, ok, Freud in a theoretical, not to be taken too seriously without figures, sense, was important in encouraging empirical research. The problem is that the "shrink", psychoanalysis or psychiatrist culture so popular in america (especially with the rich) and the increase in these pretend psychologist on TV in the UK, rides on the back of fraudulent claims at best. Even Freud admitted that his rates of helping mentally ill people through psychoanalysis were below chance, and I continue to believe that wish-washy talk about personality, often, if not, always, over-simplifies brain function.
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 15:51,
archived)
I absolutely agree :DFreudian psychoanalysis (and fucking stupid state-the-bloody-obvious-or-just-make-shit-up pop-psychology) have no place in the modern application of psychology.
You say you're a cog-neuropsych? Where do you study/work?
(You say you're a cog-neuropsych? Where do you study/work?
Fishcat Difficult difficult lemon difficult.,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 16:03,
archived)
In Jena, Germany.If I pass my exam in 2 weeks, I'll be doctor, which I find slightly hilarious.
I'm studying audiovisual integration (combination of faces and voices and the perception thereof) but I'm doing some single modality stuff too.
You appear to know your stuff though, what is it you do?
(I'm studying audiovisual integration (combination of faces and voices and the perception thereof) but I'm doing some single modality stuff too.
You appear to know your stuff though, what is it you do?
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 16:10,
archived)
Like the mcgurk effect? (is that what it's called? It's been a while!)I did my batchelors in psychology at Cardiff two years ago, am now doing a masters in diplomacy but I miss the SCIENCE!
Would love to go back and do a phd though.
(Would love to go back and do a phd though.
Fishcat Difficult difficult lemon difficult.,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 17:03,
archived)