Via email: International Psychoanalysis.
Specially for Caledonian, who was disappointed that I didn't explicitly state the unscientific nature of Sigmund Freud's theories in my post about the psychology of Alfred Hitchcock.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
A couple Science Bloggers have been giving Freud a hard time lately. In a post on Malcolm Gladwell's Blink, Jonah Lehrer of The Frontal Cortex wrote:
So why was Blink less than satisfying for me? Becase Gladwell ended up lumping together all sorts of research, from Damasio's Iowa Gambling Task to…
Alfred Hitchcock (1899-1980) was one of the most outstanding filmmakers of the twentieth century. In a career spanning six decades, Hitchcock made 53 films, the best of which are at once suspenseful, exciting, disturbing, funny and romantic.
The 'master of suspense' pioneered many of the…
Charlie Rose recently ran a show billed as "A discussion about the legacy of Sigmund Freud." I'd urge anyone interested in the impact of neuroscience on psychotherapeutic practice to take the time to watch it.
The title is a bit misleading. It's less a discussion of Freud's contributions than it is…
My first introduction to psychology was in a required social science class in college over 20 years ago, reading Sigmund Freud's Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. The experience made me think I'd better be careful if I ever had kids: I didn't want them telling their psychoanalysts how my…
What do you think of recent attempts to marry (or vindicate) psychonalysis with neuroscience? I don't have personal acquaintance with the stuff, but friends of mine are infatuated with it. I'm thinking of people like Allan Schore and Peter Fonagy.
I'd never heard of either of these guys, so I can't really comment. But, despite my scepticism about Freud and psychoanalysis, I think their work is worth looking into. Anything that aims to make pscyhiatry more scientific MUST be good.