joanna wrote:
>
> Also interesting that they completely misunderstand what the "therapy"
> is about. It's not about unearthing secrets. There are no secrets.
This is irrelevant. We are talking about the claims made by psychoanalysis about the general nature of human thought and feeling, not about what happens in an individual analysis on a particular day. Freud talks about a non-existent object he calls "The It." He sees it as operating in all humans.
But in any case, read Crews. I don't make arguments about psychiatry any more than I make arguments about nuclear physics or neurology. The rejection of Freud is nearly as universal amongst neuroscientists (psychologists, neurologists, psychiatrists) as is the rejection of Newton's theory of gravity since Einstein published his. If someone on this list claimed that Newton told us more about gravity than Einstein, I would scoff at it but not myself argue against it.
That is what is wrong with Doug's caterwauling on femecon-l about the "quality" of the anti-Freudian arguments. My anti-Freudian arguments are in the same basket as my anti-creationist arguments. They aren't mine; I'm merely citing established opinion among those who have a basis for having an opinion.
Carrol