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


← Freud and psycho-analysis: still useful?

Sean the Sorcerer's Avatar Jump to comment 22 by Sean the Sorcerer

Comment 18 by Red Dog :

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.

Because these "quack cures" may convince a person's subjective mind that they work and may make them feel subjectively better even if scientific tests can't detect it. For example, I recently watched a video which attempted to debunk a faith healer by showing the deceptive methods he employed. The funny thing is, the people he was "healing" seemed genuinely happy about what he was doing, and didn't seem to care that scientifically it was a fraud. This use of the placebo effect is probably the oldest form of healing, dating back to the first shamans, yet Western science seems to want to to totally discredit it. This seems insane to me, since one's subjective state of being is all that really matters, even if it can't be measured by any known scientific method. Does this answer your question?

Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:07:29 UTC | #885813