Editing Psychoanalysis (section)

==Criticism==
<!-- 'Criticism of Freud', 'Criticism of psychoanalysis', 'Freud wars', and 'Freud Wars', redirect here -->
{{see also-text|[[Science wars]]|[[Theory wars]]}}
{{Over-quotation|section|date=November 2022}}
Both Freud and psychoanalysis have been criticized in extreme terms.<ref name="Brunner">{{Citation |title = Freud and the politics of psychoanalysis |year = 2001 |author = Brunner, José |page = xxi |publisher = Transaction |isbn = 978-0-7658-0672-7 }}</ref> Exchanges between critics and defenders of psychoanalysis have often been so heated that they have come to be characterized as the '''Freud Wars'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA-->.<ref>{{cite news |url = https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/dispatchesfromthefreudwars.htm |title = washingtonpost.com: Dispatches from the Freud Wars: Psychoanalysis and Its Passions |newspaper = [[The Washington Post]] }}</ref> Linguist [[Noam Chomsky]] has criticized psychoanalysis for lacking a scientific basis.<ref>{{cite interview|last=Chomsky|first=Noam|subject-link=Noam Chomsky|title=The Professorial Provocateur|interviewer-last=Solomon|interviewer-first=Deborah|interviewer-link=Deborah Solomon|url=http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20031102.htm|work=The New York Times|date=2 November 2003|via=chomsky.info|access-date=19 June 2010|archive-date=23 September 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923203132/http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20031102.htm|url-status=dead}}</ref> Evolutionary biologist [[Stephen Jay Gould]] considered psychoanalysis influenced by pseudoscientific theories such as [[recapitulation theory]].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Gould|first1=Stephen Jay|url=https://archive.org/details/ontogenyphylogen00goul|title=Ontogeny and Phylogeny|date=1977|publisher=[[Harvard University Press]]|isbn=978-0-674-63940-9|author-link=Stephen Jay Gould|url-access=registration}}</ref> Psychologists [[Hans Eysenck]], [[John Kihlstrom|John F. Kihlstrom]], and others have also criticized the field as pseudoscience.<ref>[[Hans Eysenck|Eysneck, Hans]]. 1985. ''[[Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire]]''.</ref><ref>[[John Kihlstrom|Kihlstrom, John F.]] 2012 [2000]. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20130510073935/http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/freuddead.htm Is Freud Still Alive? No, Not Really]" (updated ed.). ''John F. Kihlstrom''. Berkley: [[University of California, Berkeley]]. Archived from the [http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/freuddead.htm original] 10 May 2013.

— 2000/2003/2009. "Is Freud Still Alive? No, Not Really." ''[[Atkinson & Hilgard's Introduction to Psychology|Hilgard's Introduction to Psychology]]'' (13/14/15th ed.), edited by R. Atkinson, R. C. Atkinson, E. E. Smith, D. J. Bem, and S. Nolen-Hoeksema. New York: [[Harcourt (publisher)|Harcourt Brace Jovanovich]].</ref><ref name="Popper1981">{{cite book | last = Popper | first = Karl Raimund | author-link = Karl Popper | title = Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge | publisher = Routledge | edition = 4th | date = 1981 | location = London | pages = 38 | url = https://www.routledge.com/9780415285940 | doi = | isbn = 978-0-415-28594-0 | quote = And as for Freud's epic of the Ego, the Super-ego, and the Id, no substantially stronger claim to scientific status can be made for it than for Homer's collected stories from Olympus. }}</ref><ref name="Georgiev2017">{{cite book | last = Georgiev | first = Danko D. | author-link = | title = Quantum Information and Consciousness: A Gentle Introduction | publisher = CRC Press | edition = 1st | date = 2017-12-06 | location = Boca Raton | pages = 4 | language = English | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=OtRBDwAAQBAJ | doi = 10.1201/9780203732519 | oclc = 1003273264 | isbn = 978-1-138-10448-8 | zbl = 1390.81001 | quote = Terms such as ''subconsciousness'' or ''superego'' that are frequently used in ''psychoanalysis'' originated by Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) are relegated to the realm of pseudoscience where most of Freud's work justifiably belongs. }}</ref>

===Debate over status as scientific===
The theoretical foundations of psychoanalysis lie in the same philosophical currents that lead to interpretive [[Phenomenology (psychology)|phenomenology]] rather than in those that lead to [[science|scientific]] [[positivism]], making the theory largely incompatible with positivist approaches to the study of the mind.<ref name="Torrey" /><ref name="Popper">[[Karl Popper|Popper, Karl R]]. 1990. "Science: Conjectures and Refutations." Pp. 104–10 in ''Philosophy of Science and the Occult'', edited by P. Grim. Albany, p. 109, [https://books.google.com/books?id=5VewAkDw8h0C&q=Freud&pg=PA80 Preview Google Books] See also ''[[Conjectures and Refutations]]''.</ref><ref name="Webster, Richard 1995">[[Richard Webster (British author)|Webster, Richard]]. 1995. ''Why Freud was Wrong: Sin, Science, and Psychoanalysis''. London: Harper Collins.</ref>

Early critics of psychoanalysis believed that its theories were based too little on quantitative and [[experimental research]] and too much on the clinical case study method.{{citation needed|date=July 2021}} Philosopher [[Frank Cioffi]] cites false claims of a sound scientific verification of the theory and its elements as the strongest basis for classifying the work of Freud and his school as pseudoscience.<ref>[[Frank Cioffi|Cioffi, Frank]]. 2005. "[http://www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2005/was-freud-a-pseudoscientist/ Was Freud a Pseudoscientist?]" ''Butterflies & Wheels''.

Translated and published in {{cite book |editor-last1=Meyer |editor-first1=Catherine |display-editors=etal<!-- M. Borch-Jacobsen, J. Cottraux, D. Pleux, and J. Van Rillaer --> |title=Le livre noir de la psychanalyse: Vivre, penser et aller mieux sans Freud |trans-title=The black book of psychoanalysis: living, thinking and doing better without Freud |url=http://www.psychaanalyse.com/pdf/LE%20LIVRE%20NOIR%20DE%20LA%20PSYCHANALYSE%20%28833%20Pages%20-%2018.8%20Mo%29.pdf |date=2005 |location=Paris |publisher=Les Arènes |access-date=2023-06-13}}</ref>

[[Karl Popper]] argued that psychoanalysis is a [[pseudoscience]] because its claims are not testable and cannot be refuted; that is, they are not [[falsifiable]]:<ref name="Popper" />{{blockquote|text=....those "clinical observations" which analysts naively believe confirm their theory cannot do this any more than the daily confirmations which astrologers find in their practice. And as for Freud's epic of the Ego, the Super-ego, and the Id, no substantially stronger claim to scientific status can be made for it than for Homer's collected stories from the Olympus.}}In addition, [[Imre Lakatos]] wrote that "Freudians have been nonplussed by Popper's basic challenge concerning scientific honesty. Indeed, they have refused to specify experimental conditions under which they would give up their basic assumptions."<ref>[[Imre Lakatos|Lakatos, Imre]]. 1978. "The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes." ''Philosophical Papers'' 1, edited by I. Lakatos, [[John Worrall (philosopher)|J. Worrall]], and [[Gregory Currie|G. Currie]]. Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]]. p. [https://books.google.com/books?id=RRniFBI8Gi4C&pg=PA146 146].</ref> In ''Sexual Desire'' (1986), philosopher [[Roger Scruton]] rejects Popper's arguments, pointing to the theory of repression as an example of a Freudian theory that does have testable consequences. Scruton nevertheless concluded that psychoanalysis is not genuinely scientific because it involves an unacceptable dependence on metaphor.<ref>{{cite book|author=Scruton, Roger|title=Sexual Desire: A Philosophical Investigation|publisher=Phoenix Books|year=1994|isbn=978-1-85799-100-0|page=201|author-link=Roger Scruton}}</ref> The philosopher and physicist [[Mario Bunge]] argued that psychoanalysis is a pseudoscience because it violates the [[ontology]] and [[scientific method|methodology]] inherent to science.<ref name="Bunge">{{cite news|last=Bunge|first=Mario|year=1984|title=What is pseudoscience?|volume=9|pages=36–46|publisher=The Skeptical Inquirer}}</ref> According to Bunge, most psychoanalytic theories are either untestable or unsupported by evidence.<ref name="Bunge2">{{cite news|last=Bunge|first=Mario|year=2001|title=Philosophy in Crisis: The Need for Reconstruction|pages=229–235|publisher=Prometheus Lectures}}</ref>

[[Cognitive science|Cognitive scientists]], in particular, have also weighed in. [[Martin Seligman]], a prominent academic in [[positive psychology]], wrote that:<ref>[[Martin Seligman|Seligman, Martin]], ''Authentic Happiness'' (The Free Press, Simon & Schuster, 2002), pp. 64–65.</ref>{{blockquote|text=Thirty years ago, the cognitive revolution in psychology overthrew both Freud and the behaviorists, at least in academia.… The imperialistic Freudian view claims that emotion always drives thought, while the imperialistic cognitive view claims that thought always drives emotion. The evidence, however, is that each drives the other at times.}}[[Adolf Grünbaum]] argues in ''Validation in the Clinical Theory of Psychoanalysis'' (1993) that psychoanalytic-based theories are falsifiable but that the causal claims of psychoanalysis are unsupported by the available clinical evidence.<ref name="Grünbaum">[[Adolf Grünbaum|Grünbaum, Adolf]]. 1993. ''Validation in the Clinical Theory of Psychoanalysis: A Study in the Philosophy of Psychoanalysis''. Madison, CT: [[International Universities Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-8236-6722-2}}. {{OCLC|26895337}}.{{page needed|date=June 2018}}</ref>

Historian [[Henri Ellenberger]], who researched the history of Freud, Jung, Adler, and Janet,<ref name="Borch-Jacobsen 2012">{{Cite book|last1=Borch-Jacobsen|first1=Mikkel|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ifXXnQEACAAJ|title=The Freud Files: An Inquiry into the History of Psychoanalysis|last2=Shamdasani|first2=Sonu|date=2012|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-72978-9|language=en}}</ref>{{Rp|20}} while writing his book ''The Discovery of the Unconscious: The History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry'',<ref name="Borch-Jacobsen 2012" />{{Rp|17}} argued that psychoanalysis was not scientific on the grounds of both its methodology and social structure:<ref name="Borch-Jacobsen 2012" />{{Rp|21}}
{{Blockquote|text=Psychoanalysis, is it a science? It does not meet the criteria (unified science, defined domain and methodology). It corresponds to the traits of a philosophical sect (closed organisation, highly personal initiation, a doctrine which is changeable but defined by its official adoption, cult and legend of the founder).|author=Henri Ellenberger}}

===Freud===
Some have accused Freud of fabrication, most famously in the case of [[Anna O.|Anna O]].<ref>[[Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen|Borch-Jacobsen, Mikkel]]. 1996. ''Remembering Anna O: A Century of Mystification.'' London: Routledge. {{ISBN|0-415-91777-8}}.</ref> Others have speculated that patients had conditions that are now easily identifiable and unrelated to psychoanalysis; for instance, Anna O. is thought to have had an organic impairment such as [[tuberculous meningitis]] or [[temporal lobe epilepsy]], rather than Freud's diagnosis of hysteria.<ref name="Webster, Richard 1996">[[Richard Webster (British author)|Webster, Richard]]. 1996. ''Why Freud was Wrong. Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis''. London: Harper Collins.</ref>

[[Henri Ellenberger]] and [[Frank Sulloway]] argue that Freud and his followers created an inaccurate legend of Freud to popularize psychoanalysis.<ref name="Borch-Jacobsen 2012" />{{Rp|12}} [[Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen]] and [[Sonu Shamdasani]] argue that this legend has been adapted to different times and situations.<ref name="Borch-Jacobsen 2012" />{{Rp|13}} [[Isabelle Stengers]] states that psychoanalytic circles have tried to stop historians from accessing documents about the life of Freud.<ref name="Borch-Jacobsen 2012" />{{Rp|32}}

===Witch doctors===
[[Richard Feynman]] wrote off psychoanalysts as mere "witch doctors":<ref>{{Cite book|last=Feynman|first=Richard|title=The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist|publisher=Penguin|year=2007|location=London|pages=114–5|author-link=Richard Feynman|orig-year=1998}} Feynman was also speaking here of psychiatrists.</ref>

{{Blockquote| If you look at all of the complicated ideas that they have developed in an infinitesimal amount of time, if you compare to any other of the sciences how long it takes to get one idea after the other, if you consider all the structures and inventions and complicated things, the ids and the egos, the tensions and the forces, and the pushes and the pulls, I tell you they can't all be there. It's too much for one brain or a few brains to have cooked up in such a short time.<ref group=lower-roman>Feynman was also speaking here of psychiatrists.</ref>|author=|title=|source=}}

Likewise, psychiatrist [[E. Fuller Torrey]], in ''Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists'' (1986), agreed that psychoanalytic theories have no more scientific basis than the theories of traditional native healers, "witchdoctors" or modern "cult" alternatives such as [[Erhard Seminars Training|EST]].<ref name="Torrey">[[E. Fuller Torrey|Torrey, E. Fuller]]. 1986. ''Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists''. p. 76.</ref> Psychologist [[Alice Miller (psychologist)|Alice Miller]] charged psychoanalysis with being similar to the [[poisonous pedagogy|poisonous pedagogies]], which she described in her book ''For Your Own Good''. She scrutinized and rejected the validity of Freud's [[Drive theory (psychoanalysis)|drive theory]], including the Oedipus complex, which, according to her and [[Jeffrey Masson]], blames the child for the abusive sexual behavior of adults.<ref>{{cite book |title = ''Thou shalt not be aware: society's betrayal of the child'' |last = Miller |first = Alice |publisher = Meridan Printing |year = 1984 |location = NY }}</ref> Psychologist Joel Kupfersmid investigated the validity of the Oedipus complex, examining its nature and origins. He concluded that there is little evidence to support the existence of the Oedipus complex.<ref name="Kupfersmid, Joel" />

===Critical perspectives===
{{Further|Anti-psychiatry|Deinstitutionalisation}}
Contemporary philosophers [[Gilles Deleuze]] and [[Félix Guattari]] asserted that the institution of psychoanalysis has become a [[Power (social and political)|center of power]] and that its [[Confession|confessional techniques]] resemble [[Confession (religion)|those included and utilized]] within the [[Christianity|Christian religion]].<ref>[[Jeffrey Weeks (sociologist)|Weeks, Jeffrey]]. 1989. ''Sexuality and its Discontents: Meanings, Myths, and Modern Sexualities''. New York: Routledge. {{ISBN|978-0-415-04503-2}}. p. 176.</ref> Their most in-depth criticism of the power structure of psychoanalysis and its connivance with [[capitalism]] are found in ''[[Anti-Oedipus]]'' (1972)<ref>[[Gilles Deleuze|Deleuze, Gilles]], and [[Félix Guattari]]. 1984 [1972]. ''[[Anti-Oedipus|Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia]]''. London: Athlone. {{ISBN|978-0-485-30018-5}}.</ref> and ''[[A Thousand Plateaus]]'' (1980), the two volumes of their theoretical work ''[[Capitalism and Schizophrenia]]''.<ref name="Lecercle 2012">{{cite journal |last=Lecercle |first=Jean-Jacques |title=Machinations deleuzo-guattariennes |date=October 2012 |url=https://www.cairn-int.info/journal-actuel-marx-2012-2-page-108.htm?contenu=article |editor1-last=Ducange |editor1-first=Jean-Numa |editor2-last=Sibertin-Blanc |editor2-first=Guillaume |journal=Actuel Marx |publisher=P.U.F. |location=[[Paris]] |volume=52 |issue=2 |pages=108–120 |doi=10.3917/amx.052.0108 |eissn=1969-6728 |isbn=978-2-13-059331-7 |issn=0994-4524 |via=[[Cairn.info]]|doi-access=free |url-access=subscription }}</ref> In ''Anti-Oedipus'', Deleuze and Guattari take the cases of [[Gérard Mendel]], [[Bela Grunberger]], and [[Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel]], prominent members of the most respected psychoanalytical associations (including the [[International Psychoanalytical Association|IPA]]), to suggest that, traditionally, psychoanalysis had always enthusiastically enjoyed and embraced a [[police state]] throughout its history.<ref>[[Gilles Deleuze|Deleuze, Gilles]], and [[Félix Guattari]]. 1984 [1972]. "The Disjunctive Synthesis of Recording." Section 2.4 in [[Anti-Oedipus|''Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia'']]. London: Athlone. {{ISBN|978-0-485-30018-5}}. p. 89.</ref>

French psychoanalyst [[Jacques Lacan]] criticized the emphasis of some American and British psychoanalytical traditions on what he viewed as the suggestion of imaginary "causes" for symptoms and recommended the return to Freud.<ref>[[Jacques Lacan|Lacan, Jacques]]. 1977. ''Ecrits: A Selection and The Seminars'', translated by [[Alan Sheridan]]. London: Tavistock.</ref>

Belgian psycholinguist and psychoanalyst [[Luce Irigaray]] also criticized psychoanalysis, employing [[Jacques Derrida]]'s concept of [[phallogocentrism]] to describe the exclusion of women from both Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalytical theories.<ref>{{citation |author = Irigaray L |title = Speculum |location = Paris |publisher = Minuit |year = 1974 |isbn = 978-2-7073-0024-9 }}</ref>

===Freudian theory===
{{quote box|width=30%|align=right|quote=Many aspects of Freudian theory are indeed out of date, and they should be: Freud died in 1939, and he has been slow to undertake further revisions. His critics, however, are equally behind the times, attacking Freudian views of the 1920s as if they continue to have some currency in their original form. Psychodynamic theory and therapy have evolved considerably since 1939, when Freud's bearded countenance was last sighted in earnest. Contemporary psychoanalysts and psychodynamic therapists no longer write much about ids and egos, nor do they conceive of treatment for psychological disorders as an archaeological expedition in search of lost memories.|source=—[[Drew Westen]], 1998<ref>Drew Westen, "The Scientific Legacy of Sigmund Freud Toward a Psychodynamically Informed Psychological Science". November 1998 Vol. 124, No. 3, 333–371</ref>}}
A survey of scientific research suggested that while personality traits corresponding to Freud's oral, anal, Oedipal, and genital phases can be observed, they do not necessarily manifest as stages in the development of children. These studies also have not confirmed that such adult traits result from childhood experiences.<ref>Fisher, Seymour, and Roger P. Greenberg. 1977. ''The Scientific Credibility of Freud's Theories and Therapy''. New York: [[Basic Books]]. p. 399.</ref> However, these stages should not be considered crucial to modern psychoanalysis. The power of the unconscious and the transference phenomenon is vital to contemporary psychoanalytic theory and practice.<ref>{{cite book|author=Milton, Jane.|title=Psychoanalysis and Cognitive Behaviour Therapy|year=2000|pages=440}}</ref>

The idea of "unconscious" is contested because human behavior can be observed, while human mental activity has to be inferred. However, the unconscious is now a popular topic of study in the fields of experimental and social psychology (e.g., implicit attitude measures, [[fMRI]], [[Positron emission tomography|PET scans]], and other indirect tests). The idea of unconscious and the transference phenomenon have been widely researched and, it is claimed, validated in the fields of [[cognitive psychology]] and social psychology,<ref name="Westen and Gabbard">Westen and Gabbard, 2002</ref>{{Full citation needed|date=February 2022}} though the majority of cognitive psychologists does not hold a Freudian interpretation of unconscious mental activity. Recent developments in neuroscience have resulted in one side arguing that it has provided a biological basis for unconscious emotional processing in line with psychoanalytic theory (i.e., [[neuropsychoanalysis]]),<ref name="Westen and Gabbard" /> while the other side argues that such findings make psychoanalytic theory obsolete and irrelevant.

[[Shlomo Kalo]] explains that the [[scientific materialism]] that flourished in the 19th century severely harmed religion and rejected whatever was called spiritual. The institution of the [[Confession (religion)|confession]] priest in particular was badly damaged. The empty void that the newborn psychoanalysis swiftly occupied this institution left behind. In his writings, Kalo claims that psychoanalysis's basic approach is erroneous. It represents the mainline wrong assumptions that happiness is unreachable and that the natural desire of a human being is to exploit his fellow men for his own pleasure and benefit.<ref>[[Shlomo Kalo|Kalo, Shlomo]]. 1997. "Powerlessness as a Parable." ''The Trousers – Parables for the 21st Century''. UK: D.A.T. Publications. pp. 16, back cover.</ref>

[[Jacques Derrida]] incorporated aspects of psychoanalytic theory into his theory of [[deconstruction]] in order to question what he called the '[[metaphysics of presence]]'. Derrida also turns some of these ideas against Freud to reveal tensions and contradictions in his work. For example, although Freud defines religion and metaphysics as displacements of the identification with the father in the resolution of the Oedipal complex, Derrida ([[The Post Card|1987]]) insists that the prominence of the father in Freud's own analysis is itself indebted to the prominence given to the father in Western metaphysics and theology since [[Plato]].<ref>[[Jacques Derrida|Derrida, Jacques]], and Bass, Alan. 1987. ''[[The Post Card|The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond]]''. Chicago: [[University of Chicago]].</ref>{{page needed|date=June 2018}}