But how do you FEEL about that....
First of all I would like to apologize for the lack of posting for the past few weeks. I got back from thanksgiving and then it was finals and then it was break and then classes started and I have felt uninspired. I’m sure you all understand. Anyways, let’s get on with it.
I read this article a few weeks ago about how the teachings of Sigmund Freud are taught in universities, but not in psychology classrooms. Humanities class, popular culture, and modern literature openly discuss Freud’s theories but psychology departments distance themselves from psychoanalysis. Apparently psychologists find him to be, “sexist, fraudulent, unscientific, and just plain wrong”. While “fraudulent” might be pushing it, ‘unscientific” is just fine by me.
I was first introduced to Mr. Freud my senior year of high school. Of course this introduction did not take place in a psychology class, but in an English class titled “Literature and Psychology”. Ms. Birdwell introduced our class to some of Freud’s finer theories: Electra complex, Oedipus complex, interpreting our dreams, defense mechanisms, the id/ego/superego, the psychosexual stages of development, and of course Freudian slips. We analyzed “Alice in Wonderland” as though it was a dream- a very, very perverted dream. Then we discussed “Dorian Grey” and hypothesized that these theories could be applied to “One Flew over the Cuckoos Nest”. And overall I liked Freud. I mean, really- how hard is it? Everything is about sex and it’s completely appropriate to, when in doubt during discussion, raise you hand and say “that image OBVIOUSLY represents a penis”.
Of course Freud and his theories are ideal for English class and philosophy for exactly the same reasons why they are undesirable to psychologists: they do not have empirical evidence to back them up and thus can be debated endlessly. While psychology loves an ongoing debate, normally there is empirical evidence to back it up on either side. Take nature vs. nurture. There is empirical evidence showing that it is a combined effort between gene expression and environment. This is not the case with Freud. The only real conclusive discovery that Freud made was that while cocaine will give his patients a feeling of euphoria, it is also addictive.
Then there is the most disastrous aspect of Freud and why he is shunned by psychology departments: his ideas have been infiltrated by popular culture. There was a time when the vast rest of the world was ignorant to these theories but as they have been popularized they have managed to lose their credibility. For example the image of the doctor with the patient lying on the couch has become legendary but as it has become legendary it has transformed the popular opinion of psychology making it a career of clinicians and not scientists. Science and discovery is central to all theories in psychology and draws on topics ranging from cognition, biology, and social behavior. By simplifying Freud for popular consumption he has become the most infamous figure in psychology and sadly, what the field is known for which is sad considering psychology has many more interesting researchers that are credible.
While Freud did manage to popularize the field it is important for psychology departments to focus on more credible scientific research because this is the real meat of the field. Freud may be fun for the public but I would prefer “Psychological Science” over Freud anyday!
Posted: February 10, 2008 5:25 pm by Katherine Swanson | 0 comments
Tags: freud, New York Times, psychology, Science