|
I teach Developmental Psychology and noticed that the problems Gary points were more obvious in those texts. So, a few years ago (probably more than 10) I added to my list of criteria for textbooks in that course that the book must minimize its presentation of Freudian Theory. If a text presents Psychodynamic Theory as one of the theoretical approaches to our understanding of development it is consigned to the rejected pile. The first time that I applied this criterion I reduced my pile of possible texts from about 12 to three.
I do think that Psychology students should learn something about this theory, but the appropriate place for that learning is in the History of Psychology course. At that point I hope that students will learn the background that Allen is sharing with this list.
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
I teach personality theories, and History and Systems, as well as Intro. Freud takes a large amount of the intro section. Apparently psychoanalysis is a major movement or perspective influencing academic psychologists according to these texts--along with behavioral, cognitive, humanistic, and now, cultural psychology views. The origin myths perpetuated on psych students since the 60s with regard to Freud's courageous efforts to reveal unconscious dynamics, and his clever case studies, remain part of several classes that psych students take. In personality, of course, I have a whole section on psychoanalytic approaches that rests largely on ideas from the master. In history and systems there are chapters usually devoted just to psychoanalysis...sometimes repeating the origin myths that Allan discusses. In Morton Hunt's popular tome on "The Story of Psychology," Freud is chapter seven titled "The Explorer of the Depths" and Hunt, of course, refers to Freud as a __psychologist__ shaping psychology. It is noted, "Most historians of psychology credit Freud with a long string of influential discoveries, most noteworthy being that of the dynamic unconscious." (P.167) Clearly Freud is considered no mere blip on the historical--American psychology scene. That psychologists should have better coverage of the historical development of his ideas than they obviously do, is something I assume many of us here would not quarrel over. I find it amazing that anyone familiar with the usual undergrad curriculum could deny the coverage that American psychologists seem to provide--whether blindly repeating myths and misconceptions or even actively trying to carve out a place for Freud in current conceptions of neuroscience and cognition. Some quick thoughts on the way to class....Gary Peterson
Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson,
Ph.D. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
- RE: freud Dennis Goff
- Freud Drnanjo
