First week reading comments
I was reading about the founders of psychology and what they contributed (our reading for the first week, wow, a LOT of info) and I came upon various points that called my attention.
I think first of all that the most "unique" ideas (dunno how else to put it) have to be coming from Sigmund Freud, the rest are just sort of different explanations of the different human beings. The way that Freud puts the human mind (in the form of an iceberg, where you can only see so much yet there is much more to it) makes a lot of sense, but the way he describes how we each go through the Oedipus complex is a little weird, where we have sexual attraction towards the opposite sex parent and hostility towards the same sex parent. The identification part of it makes sense, but I can't agree with the rest of it. Maybe unconsciously a boy will try to be like his father because he sees how his father attracts attention from the mother, but I don't think the boy is doing that because he is attracted to the mother in a sexual way. Rather he sees the attention going on, and tries to immitate the actions of the father to get those attentions. (replace boy with girl, father with mother, same idea)
The Womb Envy theory by Karen Horney makes sense but again is questionable. For example not all of us grow up to be architects and construction guys, how can she explain that?
And the idea by Alfred Adler with the inferiority and superiority complex is pretty much common sense...expect the part where some people naturally don't want to get better, or at least they "repress" that notion, and I don't know how he would explain that.
All I can say is that these ideas come from people who had some visions...along with some issues. Freud's pessimistic views are coming from a Nazi Germany, and what can you expect, their good ideas but are coming from the person who helped, or in fact invented, cocaine, haha
I think first of all that the most "unique" ideas (dunno how else to put it) have to be coming from Sigmund Freud, the rest are just sort of different explanations of the different human beings. The way that Freud puts the human mind (in the form of an iceberg, where you can only see so much yet there is much more to it) makes a lot of sense, but the way he describes how we each go through the Oedipus complex is a little weird, where we have sexual attraction towards the opposite sex parent and hostility towards the same sex parent. The identification part of it makes sense, but I can't agree with the rest of it. Maybe unconsciously a boy will try to be like his father because he sees how his father attracts attention from the mother, but I don't think the boy is doing that because he is attracted to the mother in a sexual way. Rather he sees the attention going on, and tries to immitate the actions of the father to get those attentions. (replace boy with girl, father with mother, same idea)
The Womb Envy theory by Karen Horney makes sense but again is questionable. For example not all of us grow up to be architects and construction guys, how can she explain that?
And the idea by Alfred Adler with the inferiority and superiority complex is pretty much common sense...expect the part where some people naturally don't want to get better, or at least they "repress" that notion, and I don't know how he would explain that.
All I can say is that these ideas come from people who had some visions...along with some issues. Freud's pessimistic views are coming from a Nazi Germany, and what can you expect, their good ideas but are coming from the person who helped, or in fact invented, cocaine, haha