Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Seven Strategies of the Sophisticated Pseudo-Scientist: a look into Freud's rhetorical tool box

  • Discussion
  • Published:
Journal for General Philosophy of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In my ‘Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science’ (Journal for General Philosophy of Science 1993) I argued against Grünbaum that Freud commits all Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science. Yet how does Freud manage to fool many people, including such a sophisticated person as Grünbaum? My answer is that Freud is a sophisticated pseudo-scientist, using all Seven Strategies of the Sophisticated Pseudo-Scientist to keep up appearances, to wit, (1) the Humble Empiricist, (2) the Severe Selfcriticism, (3) the Unbiased Me, (4) the Striking but Irrelevant Example, (5) the Proof Given Elsewhere, (6) the Favorable Compromise, and (7) the Display of Methodological Sophistication. One should note that not all strategies are disreputable in themselves. But all are used very cunningly so as to hide weaknesses in Freud's arguments. To be fair, quite a few of his methodological remarks are sophisticated enough. As Freud combines these sophisticated remarks with an appalling methodology in practice, I call him a sophisticated pseudo-scientist. I do not claim that these rhetorical strategies are specific to him.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

REFERENCES

  • Cioffi, F.: 1988, ‘“Exegetical Myth-making” in Grünbaum's Indictment of Popper and Exoneration of Freud', in P. Clark & C. Wright (eds): 1988, Mind, Psychoanalysis and Science, Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derksen, A. A.: 1992, ‘Does the Tally Argument Make Freud a Sophisticated Methodologist? Grünbaum's Friendly Attempt to Save Freud as a Methodologist', Philosophy of Science 59, 75-101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derksen, A. A.: 1993, ‘The Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science', Journal for General Philosophy of Science 24, 17-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S.: 1886, ‘The Aetiology of Hysteria', The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud 3 (S.E. 3).

  • Freud, S.: 1905, ‘A Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria’ (Dora), S.E. 7.

  • Freud, S.: 1906, ‘My Views on the Part Played by Sexuality in the Aetiology of the Neuroses', S.E. 7.

  • Freud, S.: 1909a, ‘Analysis of a Phobia in a Five-year Old Boy’ (Little Hans), S.E. 10.

  • Freud, S.: 1909b, ‘Notes upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis’ (Ratman), S.E. 10.

  • Freud, S.: 1910, ‘Five Lectures on Psycho-analysis’ (1910), S.E. 11.

  • Freud, S.: 1912, Recommendations to Physicians Practicing Psycho-analysis', S.E. 12 Freud, S.: 1913, ‘The Unconscious', S.E. 14.

  • Freud, S.: 1914a, ‘Remembering, Repeating and Working-Through (Further Recommendations on the Technique of Psycho-analysis II)', S.E. 12.

  • Freud, S.: 1914b, ‘The Moses of Michelangelo', S.E. 14.

  • Freud, S.: 1914c, ‘On the History of the Psycho-analytic Movement', S.E. 14.

  • Freud, S.: 1915a, ‘A Case of Paranoia Running Counter to the Psycho-analytic Theory of Disease', S.E.14.

  • Freud, S.: 1915b, ‘The Repression', S.E. 14.

  • Freud, S.: 1915c, ‘Instinct and their Vicissitudes', S.E 14.

  • Freud, S.: 1916-17, Introductory Lectures on Psycho-analysis, S.E. 15 and 16.

  • Freud, S.: 1918, ‘From the History of an Infantile Neurosis’ (Wolfman), S.E. 17.

  • Freud, S.: 1923, ‘Remarks on the Theory and Practice of Dream Interpretation', S.E. 19.

  • Freud, S.: 1924, ‘Resistances to Psycho-analysis', S.E. 19.

  • Freud, S.: 1925, ‘An Autobiographical Study', S.E. 20.

  • Freud, S.: 1926, ‘The Question of Lay Analysis: Conversations with an Impartial Person', S.E. 20.

  • Freud, S.: 1933, ‘Revision of the Theory of Dreams', S.E. 22.

  • Freud, S.: 1937, ‘Construction in Analysis', S.E. 23

  • Freud, S.: 1938, ‘Moses and Monotheism', S.E. 23.

  • Glymour, C.: 1980, Theory and Evidence, Princeton U.P, Princeton, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grünbaum, A.: 1984, The Foundations of Psycho-analysis: A Philosophical Critique, University of California Press, Berkeley, Cal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R.: 1963, ‘Science: Conjectures and Refutations', in: Conjectures and Refutations, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R.: 1974, ‘Replies to my critics', in: Schilpp, P. A. (ed), The Philosophy of Karl Popper, Open Court, Lasalle, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph Wolpe & Stanley Rachman: 1960, ‘Psychoanalytic ‘evidence': A Critique based on Freud's case of Little Hans', The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 130, no, 8, pp. 135-148. Reprinted in: H.J. Eysenck & G.D Wilson (eds): 1972, The Experimental Study of Freudian Theories, Methuen, London, 317-341.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Weezenhof 26–10, NL-6536 JA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Athony A. Derksen

Authors
  1. Athony A. Derksen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Derksen, A.A. The Seven Strategies of the Sophisticated Pseudo-Scientist: a look into Freud's rhetorical tool box. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 32, 329–350 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013100717113

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013100717113

Search

Navigation