2006-12-30 19:05:05 · 8 answers · asked by Hiran a 1 in Social Science ➔ Psychology
The value of Freud was that he opened the door to psychology as a science; thus, the claim to be the "father of psychology". His theories have not been empirically tested and therefore, are not to be held as "truths". He developed his theories by drawing conclusions from the patients he saw in his time, which happened to be high society, rich women. Although, some of his conclusions were insightful or leave us to question the validity (because it is interesting), they remain to be only untested conclusions.
2006-12-30 19:33:41 · answer #1 · answered by Lucid 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
execs : - the undeniably astounding feeling you may get with it slushing around your inner maximum bits - nutrition is an extremely solid thermal insulator so might save you heat in the time of the wintry climate months - you would be the existence of any party in a ravenous detrimental united states - animals will chase you and devour your outfits (this must be the no. a million 'grownup' fantasy of all time hasn't it? Or is it in simple terms me...) - a sparkling trend daily! - beginning a nutrition combat may well be some lots much less complicated, additionally the easy get right of entry to to ammunition might mean you have been certain to win - all your grocery and nutrition standards could desire to be recent on your nearest food market - how handy! Cons: - in case you by hazard wandered right into a collection of obese dieters you are able to desire to mistakenly be seen as a sacrifice and be eaten. - thats all I have been given for cons...
2016-10-28 19:19:53 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I personally am a Jungian, frued had some good points about the unconscious,superconscious etc. I don't know about the Oepidian/Electra complex but psychologists seem to accept it. I read about it in Robin Skynner & John Cleese book (families & how to survive them) & the way Robin wrote it made sense.
I don't like Freud though. Jung was more spiritual.
2006-12-31 08:28:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Freud was a con. He was not a good psychologist. He took individual cases and generalised from them. Even the cases he had studied he gave bizarre interpretation of the cause of there problems. I don't know if their is an upside.
2006-12-31 05:47:40 · answer #4 · answered by funnelweb 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Freud studied with Dr. Seuss. I don't see any Freud cartoons or movies. And Freud did cocaine as well. I'll stick with Dr. Suess.
2006-12-30 19:14:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Freud was ahead of his time back in his time, but since then we have learned that sometimes a cigar is only a cigar!
2006-12-30 19:09:31 · answer #6 · answered by shermynewstart 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
critique of Freuds psycho-analysis is
unscientific original research,remains unprovable,sexist,class based & eurocentric
pro`s
Identified a subconcious, substantiated by fruedian slips, remains in use today so has some (?) evidential outcome
2006-12-30 22:20:04 · answer #7 · answered by bletherskyte 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
freud is the father of psychiatry, but as fathers tend to do, he got old and out dated. theres no proof to his theories. they can't be proven or disproven. he did his research on severely mentaly ill rich people, not on normal population.
2006-12-30 19:11:14 · answer #8 · answered by spaghetti 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋