The point is is anyone has a use for psychology they should pick someone alive to listen to instead of Freud.
Because it doesn’t matter if he got some things right when he got lost things wrong.
But I’m glad we at least agree no one should be using what he says as medicine.
Please read the articles on Wikipedia yourself, they’ll be a good starting point for you as they’re usually very balanced. Unlike the other material you’ve read.
The point is is anyone has a use for psychology they should pick someone alive to listen to instead of Freud.
Those people are likely to cite Freud in one way or the other.
But I’m glad we at least agree no one should be using what he says as medicine.
We don’t agree there. I absolutely think that people should have the option of using psychodynamic psychotherapy (among others). Both as patients and therapists. Where we’ll likely agree is that priming patients towards an analytical framework is highly problematic, see the whole “Freudian patients have Freudian dreams, Adlerian patients have Adlerian dreams” thing. But that’s recognised and worked into modern practice. Noone, literally noone, takes Freud to be an infallible prophet. That’s more of a thing Jungians do, much to Jung’s chagrin (quoth: “I’m glad I’m Jung, and not a Jungian”).
they’ll be a good starting point for you as they’re usually very balanced.
They’re a good starting point but they generally slant heavily American, if not that then Anglo. The US isn’t exactly a role model to follow when it comes to psychology.
The point is is anyone has a use for psychology they should pick someone alive to listen to instead of Freud.
Because it doesn’t matter if he got some things right when he got lost things wrong.
But I’m glad we at least agree no one should be using what he says as medicine.
Please read the articles on Wikipedia yourself, they’ll be a good starting point for you as they’re usually very balanced. Unlike the other material you’ve read.
Those people are likely to cite Freud in one way or the other.
We don’t agree there. I absolutely think that people should have the option of using psychodynamic psychotherapy (among others). Both as patients and therapists. Where we’ll likely agree is that priming patients towards an analytical framework is highly problematic, see the whole “Freudian patients have Freudian dreams, Adlerian patients have Adlerian dreams” thing. But that’s recognised and worked into modern practice. Noone, literally noone, takes Freud to be an infallible prophet. That’s more of a thing Jungians do, much to Jung’s chagrin (quoth: “I’m glad I’m Jung, and not a Jungian”).
They’re a good starting point but they generally slant heavily American, if not that then Anglo. The US isn’t exactly a role model to follow when it comes to psychology.