Not so much Freudian as fraudian!

First of all, thank you all for your good wishes directed towards the 'Memsahib'.  Alas, the fracture has not entirely mended but it is well on its way,  Even so, it means she must keep wearing the dreaded plastic boot for another fortnight, so although her ankle has improved her temper has not!

Still, I am cheered by a book review in last Saturday's Telegraph by Mr. Tim Smith-Laing.  The book concerned is a well-deserved hatchet job aimed at the ludicrous reputation of that grotesque fraud, Sigmund Freud.  Entitled 'Freud: the Making of an Illusion' by Frederick Crews.  Regular readers will remember my frequent use of the word 'psycho-babble' so you will understand my instant support for this book which, apparently, rips poor, old 'Siggie' to shreds.

It is, of course, deeply, er, Freudian that Mr. Crews was for several years a devoted student and follower of the old 'wizard' but to his credit, eventually, his intelligence began to discern the flaws in this pyramid of incredibility.

Happily, the reviewer of the book, Mr. Smith-Laing, cannot resist three cracking jokes about 'Siggie' and his preposterous theories:

There is probably no better yardstick of someone’s fame than the number of jokes you can tell about them and expect people to get; and I can think of three different punchlines to “How many Freudians does it take to screw in a light bulb?” (“Why are you so fixated on screwing?”; “Only one if he has a stool – though I don’t know how being anal-retentive helps”; “Two: one to screw in the bulb, one to hold his penis… I mean, father… I mean, ladder!”)

In essence, this book accuses Freud of being a charlatan driven to excess in his drive for fame.  To be fair, my 'knowledge' of his theories is scant, not least because even a short summary of them makes me snort with derision.  However, it is enough for me that one of my intellectual 'heroes', the late, great Karl Popper pointed out with deadly accuracy:

Freudian theories [...] were always scientifically suspect because there was “no conceivable human behaviour which could contradict them”. They could not be disproved, and so could not be confirmed either.

When one considers the malignant harm inflicted on some of his patients, I can't help wondering if we should dig the old fraud up and drive a stake through what passes for his heart!

 

 

Comments

[Whyaxye]

Good post. My philosophy professor at Uni had a deep loathing for Freud, based on Popper's point about irrefutability. It's worth noting that the other two examples of irrefutable (and therefore unscientific, useless) theories were astrology, and....Marxism. Whatever counter-examples one comes up with to refute the theories, their supporters will always have a counter-reason as to why you are wrong.

The good news, of course, is that nobody outside of Literature and Cultural Studies Departments in Universities take Freud seriously any more. The damage was done to gullible Viennese patients, but is not likely to be repeated in the future.

[Whitewall]

"I can't help wondering if we should dig the old fraud up and drive a 'stake' through what passes for his heart!"

No No No...too phallic!!

[Uncle Mort]

Also worth reading is The Freud Files by Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen. For example he makes this interesting point -

“Separated from the university and the school of medicine (Freud formally stopped teaching in 1917), psychoanalysis became a private enterprise, recruiting clients (and hence potential followers) in an unregulated market, independent of all university or governmental authority. Psychoanalysis effectively became Freud’s firm, organised like an international company based on franchises. All sorts of subsidiaries could be formed across the world, on the condition that they faithfully reproduced the proprietary mode for forming analysts.”

[Bob]

There are countless examples of pseudo-science. Holistic medicine, chiropractic, supply-side (A.K.A. trickle-down) economics, phrenology, contemporary human sub-species, religion, fortune telling, the spirit world, auras, ch'i, and so on. All, with the possible exception of phrenology, still have practicing believers.

[TheBigHenry]

Bob,

"..., still have practicing believers."

"Global Warming", AKA "Global Warning Scam".

[Bob]

Henry,

I once worked with a smart physicist who developed methods and equipment for the early Mars landers. He was also trying to work out the mathematics of Heaven in his spare time. For example, he thought there were no damping factors there. People have a powerful ability to compartmentalize. A high IQ doesn't help because it empowers better rationalizations to defend irrational positions.

As I've stated here before, there's no point in arguing AGW (though I tried once). The numbers are in and steps are already being taken. But I'm curious. Who's carrying out the AGW scam and why?

[TheBigHenry]

Bob,

Some of the principal actors in the scam include fcking Al Gore and the weatherology proctologists at the East Anglia School for Scamming. The "why" is always the same: money.

But you already knew that. Like you, I also think there's no point in arguing about this crap. I was just joshing you, not trying to initiate any argument.

Peace out, bro.

[Bob]

Henry,

Too bad Gore decided to make himself political spokesman. He could have stopped after declaring himself the most eminent stiff against naughty words in rap music.

Peace, Yo

[Richard]

Strange as it might seem, a book exists called 'The Uses of Enchantment.' This was written by someone by the name of Bruno Bettelheim. It gives Freudian interpretations of some of the best known fairy stories, which in the opinion of this reader, are pretty much spot on and are essential reading for anyone who is planning to direct pantomime.

Bettelheim was a survivor of Dachau and Buchenwald concentration camps who went on to be a professor of psychology at the University of Chicago. I doff my hat in silent respect to this extremely learned gentleman because we will almost certainly never see his like again.

[David Duff]

Hmmmmn, Richard, I just skim-read his Wiki entry and I would advise 'caveat emptor'!

[The Jannie]

A charlatan of the first order. Real scientists make notes as they work but not Siggy.