Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Alaishana t1_iwm9ai4 wrote

Freud was a fantasist. Sat in his armchair and made up 'facts' from whole cloth.

As far as I know, nothing he ever said is still accepted science.

The interesting and fascinating and INFURIATING bit though is, how many so-called psychologists and psychotherapists still adhere to his teachings. (Yes, it kind of works, bc every kind of psychotherapy 'kind of' works... espc if you don't look too closely.)

Yes, he kick started psychology... so?


egregiouscodswallop t1_iwmd1a5 wrote

Exactly! I wouldn't get in a Wright Brothers prototype so why would I go to a psychologist using pre-Atomic psychology?


noweezernoworld t1_iwmhchx wrote

You get in planes that operate based on improvements from Wright brothers prototypes. You go to psychologists that operate based on improvements from Freudian insights. That’s how science works.


tornpentacle t1_iwmlrd0 wrote

Everything Freud ever said (except one thing) has been thoroughly refuted, debunked, and ridiculed by genuine empirical science.

The only thing that has carried over is the concept of the subconscious—the mental events occur of which we are not aware.

And he didn't even start the field of psychology.

Edit: Since you had such a problem with the colloquial language used to write the comment, I added the parenthetical aside.

I also would like to add that modern psychology is not composed of improvements on Freud's nonsense, again except in the case of the subconscious (but only its existence). Modern psychology is basically entirely composed of refutations of Freud's ideas. And yes, that is how science works, and that's precisely why his ideas shouldn't be given attention in popular discourse.


onlinebeetfarmer t1_iwmrumo wrote

The contribution of the unconscious was huge though! He was also the first to popularize actually listening to patients (psychoanalysis) which gave way to talk therapy. Of course, many of his ideas about sexuality and repression are incompatible with what we know now.


The-Magic-Sword t1_iwnmq4e wrote

Even his ideas about sexuality are kind of interesting, viewed in the light that he first went forward with the finding that many women were experiencing sexual abuse and intended to expose that, and was then shut down and ridiculed by the establishment at the time-- you can read his theories that followed as a circular means to trick the establishment into allowing those women a space to talk about it and tools to somewhat cope with it, which was probably better than the nothing they would get before.


Strazdas1 t1_iwp9nrn wrote

>Everything Freud ever said (except one thing) has been thoroughly refuted, debunked, and ridiculed by genuine empirical science.

You mean to say a caricature of everything Freud ever said has been refuted, debunked and rodiculed by science that turned out to be false (see seratonin theory for example).


tornpentacle t1_iwmnsdp wrote

You don't seem to interpret language in the same way as the rest of the English-speaking world. Most people understand the concept of hyperbole.

It makes for a stronger point to have two separate sentences than to say "everything (except one thing)" in one go.

If that's your entire argument, I guess the overwhelming consensus among scientists is doing pretty well.

Edit: the guy deleted an unreasonable comment; this is a response to it. Just had to call him out on a fallacious argument.


bit1101 t1_iwmbm96 wrote

So psychology is still accepted in science.


Any_Geologist9302 t1_iwmgzhi wrote

Mainstream psychology doesn’t accept Freud’s work as scientific. That shouldn't be a controversial statement for anyone who took an intro psych class, but some people seem to take exception to it.


Strazdas1 t1_iwp9sch wrote

Anyone who took an intro psych class has only see n a caricature version of Freud. Mainstream psychology is based on psychoanalisis which was started by Freud.


Any_Geologist9302 t1_iwry9ae wrote

>Mainstream psychology is based on psychoanalisis

The dominant paradigm is cognitivism, which does not trace its theoretical roots to psychoanalysis or Freud.


Alaishana t1_iwmdrre wrote

Well, like everything to do with humans, or worse, human behaviour, or even worse than that, human thought, psychology tries to tackle an extremely complex field, where the number of variables is far too big to allow for easy if-then relations.

One of the soft sciences, definitely.

The word 'science' derives from an indo-european root meaning 'to cut' (sky, ski, scissors), and it is very difficult, maybe impossible, to cut thoughts into easy pieces that lend themselves to analysis.,human%20behavior%20and%20mental%20processes.


bit1101 t1_iwmelzd wrote

I can glean from your writing that you are very fond of your own thoughts.


tornpentacle t1_iwmmzrn wrote

The opinion expressed in his comment is pretty well representative of the opinion of basically every modern researcher, even in psychology. The only people who still like Freud are Freudian psychoanalysts, who are taking advantage of his continued romanticization in the popular imagination.

For the love of God, if you interpreted that person's comment as narcissistic, read one of Freud's'd think he was touching himself fervently while he wrote it.


6d86d9 t1_iwmumwr wrote

I can determine through empiricism that the smell of your own arouses a latent desire for copulation with maternal figures.


bit1101 t1_iwmx3kc wrote

Not all maternal figures. Just your mum.


Alaishana t1_iwmoukx wrote

I like to put some effort into what I write, yes. It is rather difficult to convey one's meaning in the shorthand style that prevails on the web.

I'm sorry if I have overtaxed you. You can look up words you don't know, I'll wait.


tornpentacle t1_iwmqrar wrote

I was with you until the didn't seem too haughty until the ad hominems :-p that person just didn't have a real argument. But don't get baited! These people are fanatics. Freud's ideas are easy to understand, which is probably why they're still so popular. Most people don't seem to like being told that their understanding of things is wrong. For some reason laypeople who are "into psychology" get especially defensive about Freud and Jung, even though they've been considered irrelevant by the field for decades and decades.


bit1101 t1_iwmvzid wrote

The extent of my love for Freud extends as far as occasionally saying 'Freudian slip'. I was just responding to the comment.


decolored t1_iwmitpp wrote

Psychology is a complicated hypothetical chamber of variables. The best of us use it pretty well and the majority of us are simply products to be assessed


kuyo t1_iwmjacx wrote

Boy, Freud would have loved to study you. Freud is much more than a fantasist, which is why he will be immortalized in human history. You will be forgotten rather quickly.


tornpentacle t1_iwmmjwo wrote

Freud would have loved to study that guy, and his unconscious biases (against someone with a negative opinion of him, Freud) and his irrational, fevered brain would have led to him saying that guy really just wants to sleep with his own mother.

There's a reason science ignores him today. Literally the only thought of Freud's that has carried over is the concept of the subconscious mind—that mental events occur of which people are not aware.

If you are not aware of how thoroughly the rest of Freud's ramblings have been debunked, then I'm afraid you haven't been exposed to even a 101-level of information.


noweezernoworld t1_iwniyj6 wrote

>a 101-level of information

And I’m pretty sure that’s where you stopped based on your uninformed commentary


splasherino t1_iwwi9si wrote

Its called "unconscious", not "subconscious". Since you claim to know so well about how Freud is wrong about everything else, it's somewhat surprising that you don't even know the correct word for what you accept him to be right about.


Any_Geologist9302 t1_iwn0be2 wrote

>which is why he will be immortalized in human history

Yes - he'll be immortalized for what he inspired, not for contributions to scientific literature.