Does VooDoo/Witchcraft/Magic Exist ?

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
That isn't completly true, while his theories are mostly suprassed or replaced now by others with more value to the field (seen as more accurate) he is respected for the work he did, and certain processes he formulated. So while modern day psychology doesn't treat his works as gospal, they still recgnise he was a necessary part of the evolution of psychology.

I like to think of him as that kind of dodgy great, great etc grandfather/uncle every family seems to have, who they dsicribe as "oh he was a good man, did good for the family, even if he was a bit, well, eccentric"

Actually it is true.

Freud like religion made crap up. His theories on dream interpretation, libido, anxiety, id, ego, and superego are merely the most easily recognizable examples of his make believe study. These items were unable to be scientifically replicated. Items that were analysed that had support when replicated were some characteristics of oral and anal personality types, castration anxiety, the idea that dreams reflect emotional concerns, defense mechanism of repression, and aspects of the Oedipus complex. Freudian concepts tested but not supported by experimental results were dreams symbolically satisfying repressed desires, resolution of Oedipus complex, women having an inferior conception of their bodies, women have lower superego standards than men, and women having difficulty achieving identity.

Christine Ladd-Franklin stated that psychoanalysis was a product of the "undeveloped German mind." Robert Woodworth called it an "uncanny religion" that led rational people ro draw absurd conclusions. John Watson called it "voodooism." James McKeen Cattel described Freud as a man who "lives in the fairyland of dreams among the ogres of perverted sex."

Freuds methods for collecting data were unsystematic and uncontrolled. Freud recorded patients words later, and did not record all of the patients words, only what he felt was important. There is no evidence that any female patient told Freud that she had been seduced by her father, and it has been contended that Freud used suggestion or other coercion, to elicit or prime for such memories. There are discrepancies between Freuds notes on therapy sessions and the published case histories. There are discrepancies on length of therapy sessions with the published case histories. Freud's patients could have been lying about events, Freud never checked the stories to verify that events occurred.

Summed up Freud's data collection was incomplete, imperfect and inaccurate.

Psychoanalysis may have been a strong presence in psychological history, but Freud was not all that much respected in the psychological community, and never totally was.

Edit: Also, Psychoanalysis was not accepted by psychology until at the very earliest 1930, at which point studies attempting to discredit Freud were begun.

I don't deny that a good portion of his theories have been debunked, fallen out of favor or viewed as wrong. However that does not so much equal as not having respect or a place in the evolution of psychology. No psychologist today is trained to practice under Freud's claims, but they are all trained to understand the part he played in the evolution of modern psychology (and, I would point out, the theories he made in regards to the unconscious, which are still of interest today.) You will hear them joke about him, and you wont hear many say he was on the money, but most will allow he played a part in psychology becoming what it is.

In certain ways he resembles certain scientists from yester year who would come up with theories (sometimes just make up theories on their own perceptions) which would remain popular for a time before later scientists would come along with more resources and an expanded understanding of the subject and one of two things would happen: it would be debunked, or it would be altered, changed, fixed, imagined. Freud is especially unpopular with people who dislike the psychoanalytical field (which is understandable) and certain philosophical stances. However this does not erase the fact he is a major contributer of bringing psychology into the mainstream, theorising on the subconscious and seeing the potential for bringing analytical discipline into the field. Once again I say it is not so much debated that he approached it wrong and could often be misguided, but once again I say that does not equal him being held in contempt by the psychological community who do recognise the part he played in its evolution.

Science is often a big popularity contest. There is far too much politicing involved. Though today its much better than it used to be.

Its fun when people jump to conclusions too quicky and with insufficient evidence, because then its very easy to design experiments debunking thier claims....getting more publicity for you.😆

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
I don't deny that a good portion of his theories have been debunked, fallen out of favor or viewed as wrong. However that does not so much equal as not having respect or a place in the evolution of psychology. No psychologist today is trained to practice under Freud's claims, but they are all trained to understand the part he played in the evolution of modern psychology (and, I would point out, the theories he made in regards to the unconscious, which are still of interest today.) You will hear them joke about him, and you wont hear many say he was on the money, but most will allow he played a part in psychology becoming what it is.

In certain ways he resembles certain scientists from yester year who would come up with theories (sometimes just make up theories on their own perceptions) which would remain popular for a time before later scientists would come along with more resources and an expanded understanding of the subject and one of two things would happen: it would be debunked, or it would be altered, changed, fixed, imagined. Freud is especially unpopular with people who dislike the psychoanalytical field (which is understandable) and certain philosophical stances. However this does not erase the fact he is a major contributer of bringing psychology into the mainstream, theorising on the subconscious and seeing the potential for bringing analytical discipline into the field. Once again I say it is not so much debated that he approached it wrong and could often be misguided, but once again I say that does not equal him being held in contempt by the psychological community who do recognise the part he played in its evolution.

I agree with your statements. My disagreement is with the idea that this statement is in error:

Freud isn't all that much respected in the psychological community, never totally was.

Freud did contribute and all else you stated. All the same, the above statement is true.

Also, I would not be surprised if Anna was not on the receiving end of Father-Daughter seduction. My readings and her behavior seem to suggest some oddity in her sexuality.

I could state further, and claim that many psychologists have strong contempt for him and his practice to this day. This would be true as I doubt you will find a behavior analyst that respects the study of psychoanalysis. Now, that being said, Freud's work impacted psychological history and psychology in general, even we cannot deny it, no matter how much we dislike his work. I also have not met a fellow psychologist that truly is happy with the stereotyping we receive due to his overtly sexual nature.

Hey there,

I want to ask you to truthfully give your opinion on supernatural (as witchcraft and demons etc.).
There has been a more or less fascinating discussion going on with someone on the Religion forum who actually claims that nearly all people on this world believed in witchcraft and sorcery and all the superstitious crap. Since I found that rather funny, I'd really like your answers to this.

JIA does....

Also sithsaber

I, for one, care less for them....cause they don't exist.

I do believe in witchcraft as in, I believe it exists.

Do I believe it works? No.

-AC

You have my support, AC.

Sure why not?...I'll believe in all that stuff...

I believe in Debbiejo, so yes.

Yeah, I like all the religions.

Like classic rock-ligion like Pagan, all the way up to multi-deity religions like Christianity.

They're only the people the Jewish could have been.

-AC

I'm smallminded on this perhaps, and I would like that added flavour in shape of supernatural events and all, but no proof = no faith.

Little bit bias huh? No proof doesn't equal to no faith..no proof, for you, equals no belief . No proof doesn't matter for a lot of people because of faith.

I think JIA would like to get his hands on this one but-someones force almost holds him in the Religion forums.

Wouldn't it be nice if the supernatural /did/ exist, though?

Originally posted by offtheset
Wouldn't it be nice if the supernatural /did/ exist, though?

Hmm, can't quite judge...in some aspects yes, in others, like Christian supernatural believes, ultimately no.

I'm confused. When did the Gay/Bush/Abortion/Sock forum become the Religion forum?

I think that can nearly be called a synonym.

I believe that the elves killed off the orcs. If that counts

Originally posted by botankus
I believe in Debbiejo, so yes.

I've been found out.........Mmmmm demon....torment...

what do you believe is witchcraft?

telepathy? I think some people are telepathic, some may think someone who is telepathic is also a witch.

walk-ins? Some think that if you have a walk-in, it's a demon possession, it depends on if you and the walk-in get along, I suppose.

Herbs and roots and tentures? That's just chemistry and using teas and plants to heal, nothing hocus pocus about that...

what do you consider as a witch? someone who speaks against the church?

before my "mom" died, I was 10, on my way to church camp. We were told so many times in Sunday school that people don't hear the voice of God and God doesn't talk to people, now mind you, there were about 2 blacks out of all the people in this church camp, everyone else was white. Well, on the bus, I heard a voice tell me that I would never see my "mom" again and that she was dead, the adults thought I was just being bratty and wanted to go home, the kids thought I was being silly. I cried so loud and told the bus driver to turn around. Of course, my sunday school friends thought I was crazy. Until 3 days before Sunday school ended, we were in church and I saw an image that told me my "mom" had passed away, I told the girl next to me and she said to me to stop talking crazy. That morning, the minister of the church asked me to get ready to go home b/c my "mom" had passed yesterday. Some may think, why did "God" speak to me and not them, or if i was a good enough girl to even hear the voice of God. Knowing her death in advance kept me from losing it, even though most thought i was crazy for saying it and saying it came from God, even though we were in a church setting.