Most psychologists don’t care about Freud’s work outside of a historical sense and kinda hate him as a person. His work was quite literally used as an example of pseudoscience by Karl Popper.

And yet for some reason philosophers have an obsession with integrating his views into their work and artists keep using his views as inspiration and analyze existing works via the lens of psychoanalysis.

Why?

  • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    82 months ago

    That is bullshit. Everyone with a pulse knows the brain processes information unconsciously. It’s the basis for most of cognitive psychology, in fact.

    • @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      12 months ago

      Unconsciously, sure. Like, it turns three colour channels into a rainbow plus shades. Subconsciously, no, there’s no (measured) suppressed self that wants to fuck mom or whatever.

      • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        02 months ago

        Of course there is. For example there’s the study where they brushed chairs with testosterone.

        The response to that chemical being present demonstrates goal-driven personality operating below the level of consciousness.

        Uncovering unconscious motivations is like 95% of therapy. Everything that isn’t yet articulated is the subconscious.

        • @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          12 months ago

          Uncovering unconscious motivations is like 95% of therapy.

          I’ve done a ton of it, from multiple different practitioners, and none of it was like that. It was more about changing habits and examining conscious but unchallenged beliefs.

          Even good psych has replication problems. I don’t know where your funky chair study was published or the methodology and sample size, but I’m skeptical that amounts to a lot of evidence of anything.