Sigmund Freid's Psychodynamic Theory
Sigmund Freud's Psychodynamic Theory do not constiture proper science? Evaluate this claim.
Sigmund Freud was the founder of the Psychodynamic theory in the 1800’s. During his lifetime and since his death, the scientific world has scrutinized his work and findings. Till this day, there is much debate as to whether Sigmund Freud’s theory constitutes proper science. We shall attempt to evaluate this statement by taking a closer look at the definition of what constitutes “proper science”. In order to define science we will take a look at the history of science in a broader term. Sigmund Freud’s impact on the 20th century has been enormous, he has impacted the way we think and how we think about the workings of the human mind. Psychoanalysis, a method of psychodynamic therapy, suggested new ways of thinking about our emotions and conflicts. We will take a closer look at who Sigmund Freud was and the impact he left on the world after his death. In essence there are many who oppose Freud’s theory as being truly scientific in nature. On the other hand there are many theorists who believe Freud’s theory has been powerfully transformative. We will assess some of these for and against theorist to conclude with an objective stance as to whether or not Freud’s Psychodynamic Theory is proper science. What is Freud’s Psychodynamic theory? The psychodynamic theory created by Freud is focused on revealing unconscious motivations and conflict through a variety of methods, such as; Psychoanalysis, free association, dream analysis and counter transference to name a few. What is science? This question in itself is not as clear cut as it sounds. The scientific nature of the psychodynamic theory has been a controversial and highly debatable topic in and of itself. Langdridge, (2002) defines science as based on facts through observed data and the use of all five senses rather than personal opinions (p. 6-8). Therefore it can be stated that science needs to be objective. The
Sigmund Freud was the founder of the Psychodynamic theory in the 1800’s. During his lifetime and since his death, the scientific world has scrutinized his work and findings. Till this day, there is much debate as to whether Sigmund Freud’s theory constitutes proper science. We shall attempt to evaluate this statement by taking a closer look at the definition of what constitutes “proper science”. In order to define science we will take a look at the history of science in a broader term. Sigmund Freud’s impact on the 20th century has been enormous, he has impacted the way we think and how we think about the workings of the human mind. Psychoanalysis, a method of psychodynamic therapy, suggested new ways of thinking about our emotions and conflicts. We will take a closer look at who Sigmund Freud was and the impact he left on the world after his death. In essence there are many who oppose Freud’s theory as being truly scientific in nature. On the other hand there are many theorists who believe Freud’s theory has been powerfully transformative. We will assess some of these for and against theorist to conclude with an objective stance as to whether or not Freud’s Psychodynamic Theory is proper science. What is Freud’s Psychodynamic theory? The psychodynamic theory created by Freud is focused on revealing unconscious motivations and conflict through a variety of methods, such as; Psychoanalysis, free association, dream analysis and counter transference to name a few. What is science? This question in itself is not as clear cut as it sounds. The scientific nature of the psychodynamic theory has been a controversial and highly debatable topic in and of itself. Langdridge, (2002) defines science as based on facts through observed data and the use of all five senses rather than personal opinions (p. 6-8). Therefore it can be stated that science needs to be objective. The