</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
This post follows a lengthy debate from
September of last year regarding what I perceive
to be a difference between psychological aspects of behavior and
biological
(e.g., pheromonal) facts. The entire article is available
at the URL listed. Here\'s an
intro:
Psychoanalysis Is Dead ... So How Does That Make You
Feel?
http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/la
t-psycho.html
Arguably no other notable figure in history was as wrong as Freud was about
every
important thing he had to say.
By Todd Dufresne
February 18, 2004
What an utter disappointment
the 1990s were for the fans of Freud.
Time magazine asked aloud, and on its cover no less, \"Is Freud
Dead?\"
And the former analytic stronghold, the New York Review of Books,
published lengthy feature
articles debunking Freud\'s reputation as a
man and as a thinker.
By the end of the decade, even the
New Yorker was in on the action.
Taken as a whole, these sensations of the 1990s, part of the so-called
\"Freud wars,\" capture the gist of a cause well lost.
The year 2000 -- the centenary of \"The
Interpretation of Dreams\" --
should have been a triumph for Freudians. Instead, amid the
celebrations
was a funereal whiff of defeat:
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
I always thought
Freud was bullshit.
From what I could be bothered to read, he didn\'t support his fantastic theories very
convincingly.
For what it\'s worth I haven\'t read much of the Bible either.
If\'n you know what I mean.
Bookmarks