Tenets of Freudian Psychoanalysis and Their Validity...?

Question

My psych textbook brought up some good points, I think. But I was wondering what you guys think. (The more informed the response, the better.)

It happened to mention, while describing the basics of Freudian thought, that many of its basic tenets have largely been discredited in the modern day.

The most prominent example given was the idea of repression. It presented numerous studies indicating that difficult or anxiety-inducing experiences were MORE likely to be recalled with a certain vividness than commonplace experiences. If Freud's theory of regression was correct, wouldn't we expect the opposite to be true?

What's more, it mentioned the considerable lack of objectivity present in administering a Rorschach test and the questionability of its basis. It mentioned that there is no set method of interpreting the patient's responses to a series of inkblots, and as a result no genuine uniformity in results. (It also suggested that such a practice leans somewhat on the theory of repression.)

It also deemed many of his conclusions as being too retrospective and criticized his lack of valid scientific predictions.

His dreamwork was also criticized, and the idea of dreams' inherent meaningfulness was undermined somewhat.

These points aside, I am wondering: What place does the "father of psychoanalysis" have in a modern psychology (that is increasingly mechanistic)? Granted, his emphasis on the conflict between personal desire and societal restrictions, his acknowledgement of the unconscious' vital role in a person's psychic well-being, and his understanding of childhood as being formative in regards to these matters are enlightening.

But are we really to discard his other, more particular insights in a 21st century psychology? I understand the issue of sexism with the idea of "penis envy," yet I've known individuals (female) who feel that this mythos is particularly helpful in defining their relation to the opposite sex and the ensuing tensions. (I realize experience has its limits.) I don't doubt, then, that even many of his more absurd ideas carry at least an ounce of truth. If this were not so, we would not be so reluctant to part with his reasoning: it resonates, on some level, with us.

And I can't help but doubt that repression is total myth considering that its children (projection, rationalization, regressive, etc.) are easily observable and commonplace phenomena. But if today's psychology is primarily built upon testable hypotheses and scientific predictions, what place can a more intuitive psychoanalysis play?

(I personally am more Jungian, honestly, but I can't help but feel a strange fondness for Freud. While I don't want to let my "belief perserverance" get in the way, I can't help but think that psychology is just... incomplete without a field to specialize in the largely unconscious motives and conflicts which drive us.)

Thoughts?

Answer 1

Well, I'm pretty amateur on Freud, so these are my correlatingly amateur thoughts, but I think that Freud and his findings do still play a vital part in modern, "intuitive" psychology.



I don't think that Rorschach ink blots, as pretty as they are, can be proven. There is, indeed, no set result of the test, no way to translate it into numbers and compare individual points along the spectrum, but that's why it's so helpful. Instead of reducing influences, fixations and interpretations into numbers, translating people into scores on a standardized test, it's much more useful for dealing with individual patients. At the same time that it cannot be proven to be accurate or useful, it can certainly not be disproven because there's no way, thankfully, to standardize it.



As for repression, I think some of the same difficulties can exist. I can't imagine a way to calculate the vividness of a memory, though I can self-report a distinct tendency of important events and powerful moments to be more vivid than mundane life. Actually, I can't remember what I had for dinner yesterday. I can remember, with vivid detail, my first relationship and the entire week of its duration. Again, that's all self-reporting. Can you ask a patient to self-report a repressed memory? For all we know, everyone could have horrible and repressed memories, but no idea that they're there. If the coping mechanism of repression worked so well that we could live our day-to-day lives without conflict from these memories (as it's theorized to do) then why would any of us functioning citizens ever encounter this blocked time in our lives? Perhaps it's underreported because it's working. Or, perhaps it's underreported because it doesn't happen that often. Maybe repression isn't near what Freud thought it was, but that doesn't discredit the rest of his ideas.



I would, however, disagree with your evidence for repression on the basis of other coping mechanisms. Though projection, rationalization, regression, repression and all the others that I can't remember have the same purpose (to help cope with our normal life), I do not believe them to be the "children" of repression alone. In fact, I believe that repression would probably be the most inbred and distant relative to these much more common mechanisms.



The concerns about the lack of predictability are entirely valid, however. For such a great thinker, Freud was much more responsive than proactive. I think the expectations people have for psychoanalysis are a little bit much, though. Can Freud swoosh in with a leotard and a cape every time someone has a traumatic experience, warn them about the dangers of projecting their insecurities unto others, and then fly off to stop a bank robery? As wonderful an image as that is, I don't think it's very plausible. Psychoanalysis is more about helping people to function, helping them to understand their past and how it effects their present, after which they'll be more capable of defending themselves from the same mistake. It's not about making the dogs drool, and can't be easily predicted or tested as such.



Of course, dreams are a whole 'nother matter that I can't even imagine getting into in this limited forum.

Answer 2

Tenets Of Psychoanalysis

Answer 3

Repression and suppression, as well as many of the other defense mechanisms originally described by Freud are still in common use today in psychodynamic psychotherapy. Freud did not have the complex imaging studies and physiologic understanding of the brain available to today's scientists, psychotherapists and psychiatrists. He did, however, lay the foundation for much of what is understood in psychodynamics. As you may have read, he predecessors went on to develop, expand and modify many of his original ideas, but still it is fair to say he is the father of psychoanalysis.

Answer 4

i be conscious of a guy who makes use of it for jokes. i be conscious of yet another guy who makes use of it for dream interpretation as a thank you to get the sufferers speaking. is going like this: affected person: "So i develop into strolling by this doorway smoking a cigar..." physician: "Did you ever seize your father and mom having intercourse once you have been a newborn?" 9 situations out of ten he's a good distance off while he does it, yet each from time to time you definately prefer to be way off with a view to get a reaction, or to coach which you're actually not some supergenius which could examine minds or despite.

Answer 5

Freud was a complex genius to develop what he did. His ideas about human defense mechanisms were well thought out and are mostly still valid today. Many psycholgists and psychiatrists are merely humanists and justify all human behavior as normal. They look for ways for deviant individuals to accept themselves without lashing out harming others in society. If that doesn't work there is always medication!

Answer 6

used alot of big words

im not even sure of ur question

but ill give my thoughts

psychology is interesting

i think Freud shud be respected for what he's discovered

maybe his ideas are sumwat old, but theres alot of truth to it

i feel a respect for him because i thought bout it, and it just made alot of sense to me