Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Psychoanalysis
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
====Critics of abuse thesis, Freud and psychoanalysis in general==== In the later part of the 20th century, several Freud researchers questioned the author's perception that his patients had informed him of childhood sexual abuse. Some of them argued that Freud had imposed his preconceived view on his patients, while others raised the suspicion of conscious forgery.<ref>Cioffi, F. 1998 [1973]. "Was Freud a Liar?" Pp. 199–204 in ''Freud and the Question of Pseudoscience''. [[Open Court Publishing Company|Open Court]].</ref><ref>Schimek, J. G. 1987. "Fact and Fantasy in the Seduction Theory: A Historical Review." ''[[Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association]]'' 35:937–65.</ref><ref>Esterson, Allen. 1998. "Jeffrey Masson and Freud's seduction theory: A new fable based on old myths (synopsis in Human Nature Review)." ''[[History of the Human Sciences]]'' 11(1):1–21. {{doi|10.1177/095269519801100101}}.</ref> These are two different arguments. The latter tries to prove that Freud deliberately lied in order to make the allegedly unfounded psychoanalysis appear as a legitimate science; the former assumes an unknowingly committed act (countertransference). Freud, aware of his retraction of the abuse thesis, replied at various places in his work in the same way to both types of argument: That natural science is a process based on [[trial and error]]. A slow but sure becoming, in which it is impossible to have precisely defined concepts from the outset, respectively phenomena that from now on have been clarified without any gaps and contradictions. "Indeed, even physics would have missed out on its entire development if it had been forced to wait until its concepts of matter, energy, gravity and others reached the desirable clarity and precision."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Freud |first1=Sigmund |title=Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 14. Selbstdarstellung |pages=84–85}}</ref> The psychologist [[Frank Sulloway]] points out in his book ''Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend'' that the theories and hypotheses of psychoanalysis are anchored in the findings of contemporary biology. He mentions the profound influence of [[Charles Darwin]]'s theory of evolution on Freud and quotes this sense from the writings of [[Ernst Haeckel|Haeckel]], [[Wilhelm Fliess]], [[Richard von Krafft-Ebing|Krafft-Ebing]] and [[Havelock Ellis]].<ref name="Borch-Jacobsen 2012" />{{Rp|30}} Psychoanalyse further was claimed as pseudoscience, cause it's central assumption of the three interlocking functions ([[Id, ego and superego|needs, consciousness, memory]]) shall [[unfalsifiable]].<ref name="Popper" /> Freud himself, who related the consciousness aspekt and the organic one of his "soul" model with the classical [[Mind–body problem|mind-body problem]], proposed to explain these "two end points of our knowledge" in the sense of Kant's [[A priori and a posteriori|a priori]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Freud |first=Sigmund |title=Abriss der Psychoanalyse |others=Gesammelte Werke |edition=17 |location=Frankfurt am Main |publication-date=1972 |pages=63–138, here: 67–69 |language=De}}</ref><ref name="HP">{{Citation |author=[[Aikaterini Fotopoulou]] |title=The history and progress of neuropsychoanalysis |date=May 2012 |work=From the Couch to the Lab |pages=12–24 |publisher=Oxford University Press |doi=10.1093/med/9780199600526.003.0002 |isbn=978-0-19-960052-6}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Schött |first1=Margerete |last2=Schmidt |first2=Anna-Christine |date=2021 |title=neuropsychoanalysis |url=https://dorsch.hogrefe.com/stichwort/neuropsychoanalyse |journal=Dorsch Lexikon der Psychologie |language=de}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Blass |first1=Rachel B. |last2=Carmeli |first2=Zvi |date=February 2007 |title=The case against neuropsychoanalysis. On fallacies underlying psychoanalysis' latest scientific trend and its negative impact on psychoanalytic discourse |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17244565 |journal=The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis |volume=88 |issue=Pt 1 |pages=19–40 |doi=10.1516/6nca-a4ma-mfq7-0jtj |issn=0020-7578 |pmid=17244565}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)