you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Not in postgraduate. Which the last comment made pretty clear that, at high levels, Freud is not seen as a complete fraud (mostly).

I have mixed feelings about Lacan, although that's not my real academic position.

None in postgraduate is looking at old models [of anything] as absolute truths.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    I think i see the two senses of where the miscommunication occurred.

    You can put psychoanalysis in the same bucket at homeopathy in that it doesn't work when studied by clinical trials, and mainstream practitioners don't use it.

    On the other hand, Freud was not trying to be fraudulent, and did contribute tremendously to the field of psychology, unlike homeopathy's fraudulent relationship to medicine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment