Originally posted by inimalist
I'm not saying Wundt wouldn't be a good role model, I'm saying he isn't on of mineand regarding Freud, well, I just disagree and I think you are confusing the popularity and hype around Freud as a personality with anything he might have done significant for science, and without a doubt, Freud's ideas about the mind and individuals still are preeminent in our society, doing a huge degree of damage to how people understand psych
I was at a dinner for the grad students in my department, and I asked them what they thought of Freud. Of the 6 I asked, 5 said, point blank, he was a joke. The sixth only said he deserved respect as a popularizer of science in his time, but scientifically was a joke. Freud wasn't even really ahead of his time compared to his contemporaries. Don't take this personally, but imho, saying you respect Freud as a psychologist is like saying you like Dr. Phil as a therapist. Sure, more people know who he is than, say, someone who does real and worthwhile science, but how is that a good thing when that popularity corrupts people's understanding of human behaviour?
[and I'm not just focusing on the layman. It set ALL psych back decades, we have just been able to drop 99% of what he said, whereas the public has yet to. There is no redeeming theoretical quality to Freud's work, and even people of his time knew this (Jung for instance)]
"Joke" would not be the proper label, imo. "Quack" or "dishonest science" would be better. And it's difficult to see him as this evil/destructive force when he helped modernize psychology and created lots of interest. You label it as "joke science that created popularity" and I'll label it as a scientist with dishonest/plain wrong methods that built a large foundation for modern psychology to take root.
And I think you've completely misunderstood my position.
Think of it an alternative way: pretend I become super infamous because I protest gays at dead soldiers funerals. My protests are obviously appalling, but I am bringing to light how important it is to be more tolerant of other's lifestyles. Sure, maybe I gain a few detractors that believe in my rubbish, but I am bringing to light a lot more enlightenment to others that disagree with me than people who follow me. I am talking about the Westboro Baptist church (WBC)... But I don't think they are even remotely as close to creating good from their (WBC) opposers than Freud did with his work. Because of Freud's work and people's willingness to disprove it/discredit it/take an interest in doing good science, psychology came a lot further today than it would have with out him. We needed a Freud type to spur interest. Freud was a pioneer and he was bold in what he did.
This is opinion but I do not find the following bad: "I find some of Freud's motivations and accomplishments to be role model worthy."
My grandfather is a huge role model for me, but he was mildly racist. That doesn't mean I can't appreciate that he was an extremely hard worker and valued altruism.