The Making of a “Freud Basher,” or Reflections of a “Supercilious Neurotic…”

The European Legacy 19 (1):72-82 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A well-known critic of Freud discusses in frank terms the features of psychoanalysis that still attract scholarly interest, and the polemics that deform research and defames criticism. The author defends Freud criticism from ad hominem charges and outlines serious problems with scholarship in the field, including fraud, bad faith, and a disregard for professional standards. But he also indulges and explores the supposedly “pathological” undercurrents of Freud criticism. His surprising conclusion: in a way the field of Freud Studies is sick, and does bring out the worst in everyone.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1080/10848770.2013.859784

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,881

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Can functionalism provide the proper basis for a core theory of psychoanalysis?Roland Peterson & Sybe Terwee - 1994 - Philosophical Psychology 7 (4):463-469.
Freud’s Wretched Makeshift and Scheler’s Religious Act.Robert Arp - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:405-429.
The concept of energy in psychoanalytic theory.Judith B. Winter - 1971 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 14 (1-4):138-147.
Studies of abnormal behavior in the rat. IV. Abortive behavior and its relation to the neurotic attack.N. R. F. Maier - 1940 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 27 (4):369.
Psychoanalysis and human rationality.Sean Sayers - 1991 - Journal of Social Philosophy 22 (2):60-70.
Nicholas Maxwell, Is Science Neurotic? London: Imperial College Press (2004), 228 pp., $60.00 (cloth).Joseph Agassi - 2008 - Philosophy of Science 75 (4):477-479.
Disaster impacts: Implications and policy responses.Reid Basher - 2008 - Social Research: An International Quarterly 75 (3):937-954.
Ricœur's Freud.Richard J. Bernstein - 2013 - Études Ricoeuriennes / Ricoeur Studies 4 (1):130-139.
The relation of conditioned response strength to anxiety in normal, neurotic, and psychotic subjects.Kenneth W. Spence & Janet A. Taylor - 1953 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 45 (4):265.
A Philosophical Dialogue Between Heidegger and Freud.Richard R. Askay - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Research 24:415-443.
Naturalistic explanations of religion are as old as Xenophanes (570–480bc). The most famous are probably those of Feuerbach, Marx, and Freud. I must confess that I don't find these three famous explanations of religion very interesting. 1 Large parts of them are unintelligible (this is particularly true of Feuerbach's writings on religion) and the parts that are intelligible are vague and untestable (Feuerbach and Freud), or else they demand allegiance to some very comprehensive theory that has been tried and found wanting on grounds unrelated to religion (Marx's theory of the dialectics of history and Freud's psychology). [REVIEW]Peter van Inwagen - 2009 - In Jeffrey Schloss & Michael J. Murray (eds.), The Believing Primate: Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Reflections on the Origin of Religion. Oxford University Press.
Narrating the modern’s subjection: Freud’s theory of the Oedipal complex.Eyal Chowers - 2000 - History of the Human Sciences 13 (3):23-45.
Defense, dreams and rationality.Harvey Mullane - 1983 - Synthese 57 (2):187 - 204.
Making the unconscious conscious: Wittgenstein versus Freud.Frank Cioffi - 2009 - Philosophia 37 (4):565-588.
To hell and back: Sartre on (and in) analysis with Freud.Peter Caws - 2005 - Sartre Studies International 11 (s 1-2):166-176.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-15

Downloads
33 (#484,501)

6 months
4 (#790,394)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references