This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Freud and psycho-analysis: still useful?

Red Dog's Avatar Jump to comment 18 by Red Dog

Comment 17 by Sean the Sorcerer :

Freud, like Jung and so much else that is called “psychology,” is really a branch of the occult: fascinating, insightful, bewildering, irrational, creative and utterly subjective. You can spend decades studying the stuff and never really pin it down. I like to think of it as part of the great Art of the Subjective Mind, which is the antithesis of Science and perhaps the last great frontier of knowledge. I love the stuff myself because some part of me strongly resists the idea that there is One True Way called the Scientific Method to which all knowledge must be subjected before it may be accepted as True.

I think many of you need to do some self-reflection and consider the possibility that what you are promoting here is really a form of intellectual fascism which seeks to sacrifice almost the entirety of human thought upon the altar of Science. It seems to me that the debate between science and religion, science and art, science and the occult, or what have you, comes down to a debate about the value of the subjective mind. Some believe that the Subjective Mind is something to be destroyed, that there is a thing called Objective Truth which exists and must be submitted to; others are of the opinion that no such thing exists, or if it does, it is trumped by the Subjective Mind. I see no way to resolve this debate myself, and see the wisdom of both sides. The question is whether these Reality Wars can be settled somewhere other than the battlefield, or if all this debate is really just a waste of time.

When I read your first paragraph saying that "Freud,... is really a branch of the occult" I assumed you were attacking Freud and was going to come to his defense. But from your second paragraph it sounds as if you think that the fact that Freud's work should be considered part of the occult is actually a good thing and that we are being overly scientific in not saying that the occult should have as much relevance for mental health as science. On the contrary I think its you who need some self reflection. Why should things that we know have no scientific relevancy be any more useful for mental health than for physical health? Just as I wouldn't use a quack cure for my body such as homeopathy I wouldn't use a quack psychotherapy such as Freudian analysis.

Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:50:29 UTC | #885809