To the extent that Harris' side may be guilty of interpreting the data in a manner that underestimates the extent of parental influence, there are numerous examples of psychologists and psychiatrists influenced by Freud who grossly and harmfully overestimated it - for example:
"Schizophrenigenic mothers" versus the growing body of evidence that schizophrenia operates by diathesis-stress (and the stress usually involves the family and community, not a single parent) Bettleheim's "refrigerator parents" causing autism - total and arrogant confusion of correlation with causation, and heart-breaking for already afflicted families. This is not to say 2 wrongs make a right, just that both sides have done this to support their arguments and propose simple explanations for the results of complex developmental forces. Nancy Melucci Long Beach City College Long Beach CA -----Original Message----- From: Allen Esterson <allenester...@compuserve.com> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) <tips@acsun.frostburg.edu> Sent: Mon, Nov 16, 2009 5:37 am Subject: [tips] Critique of “The Nurture Assumption” Joan: In the first part of your critique of Harris's *Nurture ssumption* you write: When discussing the works of Freud, Watson, Skinner, and Bandura, as ell as less luminary researchers, she frequently misinterprets the hrust of their research and perspectives." (1) Would you care to give some examples of where Harris misinterprets he thrust of Freud's work. (2) You quote Harris as follows: . . . Freudian theory . . . had an impact on academic psychologists, he kind who do research and publish the results in academic journals. few tried to find experimental evidence for various aspects of reudian theory; these efforts were largely unsuccessful. A greater umber were content to drop Freudian buzzwords into their lectures and esearch papers." You respond to this with: Again, no citation or source and I would suspect quite a surprise to he large numbers of scientific studies published in various sychoanalytic journals." First it should be made clear that Harris's comment cited above was in he context of "the first half of the twentieth century" (Harris 1998, . 10). You write of large numbers of scientific studies published in sychoanalytic journals that are effectively rebuttals of Harris's ontention. Leaving aside that my experience of glancing through past olumes of psychoanalytic journals on numerous occasions tells me that utting "scientific" in the same context as "psychoanalytic journals" s an oxymoron, I would be interested in hearing some examples of sychoanalytic studies *from the first half of the twentieth century" hat you have in mind. Allen Esterson ormer lecturer, Science Department outhwark College, London ttp://www.esterson.org -- o make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
