4 ms·

He said that everyone, men and women (and even children), were governed by subconscious sexual desires. In that respect he was pretty modern - or perhaps that t

He said that everyone, men and women (and even children), were governed by subconscious sexual desires. In that respect he was pretty modern - or perhaps that thanks to his influence, we are how we are today. But on the other hand, he did have detailed theories of male and female sexuality and how they differ. Those details (Oedpial complex, penis envy, etc.) are for the most part laughable today. But they paint an unflattering picture of both women and men, in different ways, so you do see criticism of him there.

GuB-42 9y ago
Well, it is obvious that sex matters, and maybe Freud helped with the idea that sexual desire should warrant proper consideration, however I think he did more damage with his approach than he helped modern psychology. All of his research was laughable by today's standards. Not just the details, everything. It is all misguided ideas made to look scientific. He was right on some points of course, but that's because chance make it so that even the most clueless individual can't be always wrong. Maybe I am misguided myself but I don't know why Freud is credited so much. It looks like a lot of advances in psychology start with the refutation of one of his ideas rather than built on top of them.
- SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
  A lot of modern psychology/psychiatry is based on refutations of his ideas, but it's a little unfair to level the criticisms you do through anachronistic lenses: psychology was hardly alone in that problem, the sciences were full of it. (And for that matter, a lot of modern science is based on refuting earlier science -- look into both QM and relativity coming out of the failure of experiments trying to detect the luminiferous aether, a development on a similar timeline to Freud.) Viewing 19th and early 20th century science through the lens developed by Popper and ilk in the 20th century is unfair -- they'd have done better if they had the benefit of knowing something that wasn't invented yet, naturally. Freud and contemporaries were the birth of modern psychology, in that they were a radical improvement over the prior methods, even if they don't measure up to modern standards. The reason we talk about them so much is their role in improving over what came before -- the mistakes Freud made were better than forcibly dildoing women for "hysteria" (which is what 18th century psychiatry of women often looked like). In short, we respect Freud because he was "less wrong" than his predecessors in very meaningful ways, even if he was considerably more wrong than we are now.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    Freudians used their crazy theories to do things far worse than dildoing women. Look up the history of autistic treatments for just a smatter of the terror. Remember when it was caused by the mother not loving the child?
- brighteyes 9y ago
  Yeah, a lot of advances in psychology start with refuting one of Freud's ideas, but it's no different than modern (Enlightenment) physics starting with refuting Aristotle. It doesn't mean Aristotle wasn't a massively influential genius. In fact that Aristotle and Freud are the starting point for what came after them shows how important they were. Freud deserves credit for revolutionizing an entire field, creating something new and coherent. Given the context of his time, he was a genius, like Aristotle was in his time. Also, while most of Freud's details are of course pitifully ridiculous today, the basic insight that the unconscious matters, and that we can see its influence in indirect ways, is still a valid idea today. It's debated a lot, but it's a core concept we've never abandoned, so he deserves credit for that too.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    It's not a valid idea, there is little to no scientific validity in the entire world of psychology. Psychologists will continue to chase their tails "proving" things with unscientific methods that will later be unproven. The fact that he was the first pseudo scientist to defraud the public in this field doesn't make him a genius any more than a carnival huckster is.
    - LMYahooTFY 9y ago
      Care to elaborate on your threshold of scientifically valid then?
      - valuearb 9y ago
        Repeatable experiments that don't rely on whisks of statistical credibility.

GuB-42 9y ago

Well, it is obvious that sex matters, and maybe Freud helped with the idea that sexual desire should warrant proper consideration, however I think he did more damage with his approach than he helped modern psychology. All of his research was laughable by today's standards. Not just the details, everything. It is all misguided ideas made to look scientific. He was right on some points of course, but that's because chance make it so that even the most clueless individual can't be always wrong. Maybe I am misguided myself but I don't know why Freud is credited so much. It looks like a lot of advances in psychology start with the refutation of one of his ideas rather than built on top of them.

SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
A lot of modern psychology/psychiatry is based on refutations of his ideas, but it's a little unfair to level the criticisms you do through anachronistic lenses: psychology was hardly alone in that problem, the sciences were full of it. (And for that matter, a lot of modern science is based on refuting earlier science -- look into both QM and relativity coming out of the failure of experiments trying to detect the luminiferous aether, a development on a similar timeline to Freud.) Viewing 19th and early 20th century science through the lens developed by Popper and ilk in the 20th century is unfair -- they'd have done better if they had the benefit of knowing something that wasn't invented yet, naturally. Freud and contemporaries were the birth of modern psychology, in that they were a radical improvement over the prior methods, even if they don't measure up to modern standards. The reason we talk about them so much is their role in improving over what came before -- the mistakes Freud made were better than forcibly dildoing women for "hysteria" (which is what 18th century psychiatry of women often looked like). In short, we respect Freud because he was "less wrong" than his predecessors in very meaningful ways, even if he was considerably more wrong than we are now.
- valuearb 9y ago
  Freudians used their crazy theories to do things far worse than dildoing women. Look up the history of autistic treatments for just a smatter of the terror. Remember when it was caused by the mother not loving the child?
brighteyes 9y ago
Yeah, a lot of advances in psychology start with refuting one of Freud's ideas, but it's no different than modern (Enlightenment) physics starting with refuting Aristotle. It doesn't mean Aristotle wasn't a massively influential genius. In fact that Aristotle and Freud are the starting point for what came after them shows how important they were. Freud deserves credit for revolutionizing an entire field, creating something new and coherent. Given the context of his time, he was a genius, like Aristotle was in his time. Also, while most of Freud's details are of course pitifully ridiculous today, the basic insight that the unconscious matters, and that we can see its influence in indirect ways, is still a valid idea today. It's debated a lot, but it's a core concept we've never abandoned, so he deserves credit for that too.
- valuearb 9y ago
  It's not a valid idea, there is little to no scientific validity in the entire world of psychology. Psychologists will continue to chase their tails "proving" things with unscientific methods that will later be unproven. The fact that he was the first pseudo scientist to defraud the public in this field doesn't make him a genius any more than a carnival huckster is.
  - LMYahooTFY 9y ago
    Care to elaborate on your threshold of scientifically valid then?
    - valuearb 9y ago
      Repeatable experiments that don't rely on whisks of statistical credibility.