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 ]

I was just rereading your posting, which had sent me to the Bovasso contributions, and to my reply to them. Actually, your posting is clearer than theirs. Perhaps I missed the forest for the trees. I agree with everything in your precis except for the facile lumping of Popper with the positivists. This isn't to say that Popper was a critical introspectionist. But something is lost in the lumping.

The misidentification of Popper with the positivists is a common one and originates, according to Popper himself, with his being unread and misconstrued by the Frankfurt School (Habermas et al.). See "Who killed Logical Positivism?" in his "Unended Quest". He claims credit. I also like his comment to the effect that one doesn't have to embrace the whole Oedipal doctrine before being able to interpret logical positivism as a form of father-killing.

Popper allows us to leave the positivists behind, and to remain in the sciences while being open to such things as critical introspection. The lumping leaves us with no recourse but to dump the whole scientific enterprise in toto and set up an entirely separate exercise. But then the solution is as bad as the problem.

John A. O'Neil, MD, FRCPC
Dept. of Psychiatry, McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

 


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 ]

I was just rereading your posting, which had sent me to the Bovasso contributions, and to my reply to them. Actually, your posting is clearer than theirs. Perhaps I missed the forest for the trees. I agree with everything in your precis except for the facile lumping of Popper with the positivists. This isn't to say that Popper was a critical introspectionist. But something is lost in the lumping.

The misidentification of Popper with the positivists is a common one and originates, according to Popper himself, with his being unread and misconstrued by the Frankfurt School (Habermas et al.). See "Who killed Logical Positivism?" in his "Unended Quest". He claims credit. I also like his comment to the effect that one doesn't have to embrace the whole Oedipal doctrine before being able to interpret logical positivism as a form of father-killing.

Popper allows us to leave the positivists behind, and to remain in the sciences while being open to such things as critical introspection. The lumping leaves us with no recourse but to dump the whole scientific enterprise in toto and set up an entirely separate exercise. But then the solution is as bad as the problem.

John A. O'Neil, MD, FRCPC
Dept. of Psychiatry, McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

 


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 |