Freud
I am not writing this to discredit Freud. Some of his basic observations of human thought processes and internal power struggles are very interesting, and even today are applicable and visible in everybody's lives. I think that Freud has some interesting ideas, but it seems like his relation of everything to sexuality and the desire to procreate is a little too far-fetched for me to go along with. What about the other basic primal instincts of humans? Don't we also have drives to obtain food and water to sustain our lives? There is also the drive to find warmth, shelter, and affection. Freud would argue that the desire to be loved would fall under the category of sexuality, but I think that it is more that people like knowing that they are noticed, appreciated, and cared for, not that they want to procreate with the person they are receiving affection from.
Another idea of his that I disagree entirely with is the development of female sexuality. Apparently it is not uncommon for people to disagree with him on this topic because it was the basis on which his ideas were discredited. The main part that hit me was the idea that children fall in love with their parents. it may be true in some cases, but to say that this happens to every single child and is a natural part of development is a little ridiculous. The reason I disagree with this so strongly is because of my relationship (or lack thereof) with my father. As a child and continuing into my early teens, I was hit a lot and yelled at continuously. For the majority of my life I have been scared to death of my father to the point that we don't even talk though we still live in the same house. To say that I am part of a mold where I fell in love with him and wanted to replace my mother while simultaneously I wanted nothing more than to leave and never see him again makes no sense at all.
It seems that some of the more flawed ideas of Freud's came from the fact that his group of people he observed was very skewed. His patients were all aristocratic Austrian or German aryans. This is entirely speculation, but I think that some of his "observations" were actually ideas that he came up with before observing them in his patients. He would then apply these preconceived ideas to his patients as the appropriate situation arose. An example of this is with his dream analysis. The idea that anything long represents a phallus or attacking power can be applied to pretty much any dream. He probably could have made any dream seem like a struggle between the person's ego and either power from an outside source or power from the id.
I also had some problems with the way Freud defined the id so that he would always be right. To say that nobody has the capability to know what their desires are allows him to seem brilliant in defining then when in actuality he could make up anything he wanted. One particular case mentioned in the textbook that bothered me was when he had difficulty finding meaning in his patient's dream, he said the actual meaning was that the patient's id wanted to proove Freud wrong so it created an indecipherable dream.
Although Freud's ideas have now basically been discredited, I don't think that anybody should write him off as a crazy old man. Some of his observations, about inner power struggles for example, were very astute. Rather than trying to prove him wrong, I think it would be more productive if psychologists tried to add their ideas into one collective theory rather than compete against each other.
Another idea of his that I disagree entirely with is the development of female sexuality. Apparently it is not uncommon for people to disagree with him on this topic because it was the basis on which his ideas were discredited. The main part that hit me was the idea that children fall in love with their parents. it may be true in some cases, but to say that this happens to every single child and is a natural part of development is a little ridiculous. The reason I disagree with this so strongly is because of my relationship (or lack thereof) with my father. As a child and continuing into my early teens, I was hit a lot and yelled at continuously. For the majority of my life I have been scared to death of my father to the point that we don't even talk though we still live in the same house. To say that I am part of a mold where I fell in love with him and wanted to replace my mother while simultaneously I wanted nothing more than to leave and never see him again makes no sense at all.
It seems that some of the more flawed ideas of Freud's came from the fact that his group of people he observed was very skewed. His patients were all aristocratic Austrian or German aryans. This is entirely speculation, but I think that some of his "observations" were actually ideas that he came up with before observing them in his patients. He would then apply these preconceived ideas to his patients as the appropriate situation arose. An example of this is with his dream analysis. The idea that anything long represents a phallus or attacking power can be applied to pretty much any dream. He probably could have made any dream seem like a struggle between the person's ego and either power from an outside source or power from the id.
I also had some problems with the way Freud defined the id so that he would always be right. To say that nobody has the capability to know what their desires are allows him to seem brilliant in defining then when in actuality he could make up anything he wanted. One particular case mentioned in the textbook that bothered me was when he had difficulty finding meaning in his patient's dream, he said the actual meaning was that the patient's id wanted to proove Freud wrong so it created an indecipherable dream.
Although Freud's ideas have now basically been discredited, I don't think that anybody should write him off as a crazy old man. Some of his observations, about inner power struggles for example, were very astute. Rather than trying to prove him wrong, I think it would be more productive if psychologists tried to add their ideas into one collective theory rather than compete against each other.