Freud and science

[kristopaivinen]

From the idea I've got from reading Freud's works, it seems that there's no possibility to test some of his psychotherapeutic theories. Surely, there's no way to falsify a statement which says that psychoanalysis heals anyone who is willing to surrender to it. Even worse is the Oedipus complex, which Freud believed to exist in all people. To falsify such a claim, we would only have to point out a single person where it doesn't exist. Doesn't seem so hard, does it? But how can we demonstrate me that there is no Oedipus complex in some person?

[uberhobo]

From the idea I've got from reading Freud's works, it seems that there's no possibility to test some of his psychotherapeutic theories. Surely, there's no way to falsify a statement which says that psychoanalysis heals anyone who is willing to surrender to it. Even worse is the Oedipus complex, which Freud believed to exist in all people. To falsify such a claim, we would only have to point out a single person where it doesn't exist. Doesn't seem so hard, does it? But how can we demonstrate me that there is no Oedipus complex in some person?

With an operational definition of the Oedipus complex, which wasn't really Freud's forte.

[Howay the Toon]

From the idea I've got from reading Freud's works, it seems that there's no possibility to test some of his psychotherapeutic theories. Surely, there's no way to falsify a statement which says that psychoanalysis heals anyone who is willing to surrender to it. Even worse is the Oedipus complex, which Freud believed to exist in all people. To falsify such a claim, we would only have to point out a single person where it doesn't exist. Doesn't seem so hard, does it? But how can we demonstrate me that there is no Oedipus complex in some person?

Freud's theories were one of Popper's main targets when he came up with falsififiability as a key demarcation criterion between science and pseudoscience.

[kristopaivinen]

So should I not go see a psychoanalytic shrink?

What about other forms of psychotherapies. Are these usually any more scientific?

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Some say they weren't falsifiable and some argue they are and have proven false. Some ideas seem to point towards real processes, like defense mechanisms and the fact that we may act from motives that escape us and we can argue that are motivations are different from the real ones without being mendacious. Frued was the source of an enormous amount of theories that came later, he was truly an amazing figure whose legacy lives on today in the field of psychology.

Even though this sounds apologetic, I just wanted to point out his achievements, I'm fully conscious (!) of his blunders too, I read about this all through college.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

So should I not go see a psychoanalytic shrink?

What about other forms of psychotherapies. Are these usually any more scientific?

Psychoanalysis, no. Psychodinamic therapy (direct heir of psychoanalysis designed for greater efficacy) yes −well, it depends. You might have a better chance with cognitive therapy. Let me look up a paper on the web that's totally relevant to this subject....



----------
Here we go, this is from the American Psychological Association:
How to Find Help Through Psychotherapy (http://apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=52)
and
The Efficacy of Psychotherapy (http://www.apa.org/practice/peff.html)