Online Dictionary of Mental Health
Top Ten Bestsellers (continuously updated): abuse, adhd, adoption, aging, aids, alcoholism, alternative medicine, anxiety disorders, autism, bipolar disorder, child development, child care, conversion disorders, counseling psychology, cults, death and dying, depression, dissociative disorders, domestic violence, dreams, eating disorders, forensic psychology, gay, lesbian & bisexual, grief, learning disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, parenting, personality disorders, professional counseling and psychotherapy, psychiatry, psychopathy, PTSD, rape, schizophrenia, sexual disorders, self-esteem, self-help, stress, suicide, violence.

[ HOME | A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z ]

 | What's new | Search | Guestbook | Feedback | Add Your URL |

Burying Freud

[ Burying Freud Homepage | Freud's Seduction Theory Homepage ]

In the second of his articles on the Burying Freud Web site Frederick Crews makes the following comment:

"Self-evidently, the public is entitled to know which distinctive claims of Freud's, if any, have received significant confirmation outside  the Freudian belief system. The answer is: not a single one. Readers
who find that result hard to believe could consult Edward Erwin's just-published book, A FINAL ACCOUNTING: PHILOSOPHICAL AND EMPIRICAL ISSUES IN FREUDIAN PSYCHOLOGY (MIT Press). Erwin soberly reviews all relevant studies and concludes, with impeccable logic, that the entirety of psychoanalytic theory, along with the Freudian claim to special therapeutic efficacy,
remains devoid of any appreciable corroboration."


I wonder if ANY belief system can receive significant confirmation from outside itself. Is confirmation not linkage? It would seem impossible -- no? -- to confirm something as valid and not become an extension of the system one confirms. One's corroboration or lack thereof links or separates -- except, of course, if one clings to the fantasy that one's "pure" value-neutrality positions one outside (above) such effects, such consequences, into some disembodied realm of pure judgement, and/or as the unwashed, uninformed psychotherapists have it, infantile narcissistic omnipotence.

Crews opens his post referring to a self-evident public entitlement; who is this "public"? Many analysts would consider it only an object representation of Crews' own mind -- much as American politicians use the "American People" as synonymous with their own followers. As for "self-evident" -- does this "self" relate to this same public? To Crews? To me? To those advocates for psychoanalytic debunking whom Crews represents? I thought the quality of "Self-evidence" is exactly what so irritates these people about the psychoanalytic paradigm.

I wonder how much of this sudden paradigmatic "confrontation with the heathen" is politically or economically-driven, as such ventures often seem to be.

Jonathan Ames


human-nature.com
Ian Pitchford and Robert M. Young - Last updated: 28 May, 2005 02:29 PM

US -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.com logo

UK -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.co.uk logo

 | Human Nature | The Human Nature Daily Review | Psychiatry Research Online |

Burying Freud

[ Burying Freud Homepage | Freud's Seduction Theory Homepage ]

In the second of his articles on the Burying Freud Web site Frederick Crews makes the following comment:

"Self-evidently, the public is entitled to know which distinctive claims of Freud's, if any, have received significant confirmation outside  the Freudian belief system. The answer is: not a single one. Readers
who find that result hard to believe could consult Edward Erwin's just-published book, A FINAL ACCOUNTING: PHILOSOPHICAL AND EMPIRICAL ISSUES IN FREUDIAN PSYCHOLOGY (MIT Press). Erwin soberly reviews all relevant studies and concludes, with impeccable logic, that the entirety of psychoanalytic theory, along with the Freudian claim to special therapeutic efficacy,
remains devoid of any appreciable corroboration."


I wonder if ANY belief system can receive significant confirmation from outside itself. Is confirmation not linkage? It would seem impossible -- no? -- to confirm something as valid and not become an extension of the system one confirms. One's corroboration or lack thereof links or separates -- except, of course, if one clings to the fantasy that one's "pure" value-neutrality positions one outside (above) such effects, such consequences, into some disembodied realm of pure judgement, and/or as the unwashed, uninformed psychotherapists have it, infantile narcissistic omnipotence.

Crews opens his post referring to a self-evident public entitlement; who is this "public"? Many analysts would consider it only an object representation of Crews' own mind -- much as American politicians use the "American People" as synonymous with their own followers. As for "self-evident" -- does this "self" relate to this same public? To Crews? To me? To those advocates for psychoanalytic debunking whom Crews represents? I thought the quality of "Self-evidence" is exactly what so irritates these people about the psychoanalytic paradigm.

I wonder how much of this sudden paradigmatic "confrontation with the heathen" is politically or economically-driven, as such ventures often seem to be.

Jonathan Ames


human-nature.com
Ian Pitchford and Robert M. Young - Last updated: 28 May, 2005 02:29 PM

US -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.com logo

UK -
 Search:
Keywords:  

Amazon.co.uk logo

 | Human Nature | The Human Nature Daily Review | Psychiatry Research Online |