1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
The history of psychology is wild.
I remember taking psych 101 or some equivalent and there was an entire 50 minute lecture about Freud. At the end I raised my hand and was like, "This... This is all considered bullshit now, right?" I can't remember what exactly the answer was, but I do remember that it wasn't an unequivocal yes. And that scared me.
sadly, not all practitioners practice evidence-based psychotherapy. some practice non-directive conversion about joe rogan topics.
I love how accurate their faces would be in that situation. The blonde guy in the back having an existential crisis, the girl on the far left low-key excited about this idea.
Unpopular opinion: I kinda like Freud. Sure, a lot of his ideas were debunked over the years, but he was one of the first people in the field to take women's mental health seariously. He also thought of homosexuality as something that isn't a choice and can't be changed, unlike a lot if his peers.
Freud had bad ideas, sure. But he was literally one of the first people in history to academically propose that maybe there was something going on with the way people think and the choices they made that they weren't aware of (the subconscious).
I only just noticed there's dudes in this picture
Fun Freud Fact: He didn't actually start from the ideas of Oedipal Complexes and Penis Envy.
That came about because many of his clients were the children of the wealthy, and quite a few of them were reporting sexual abuse, but he couldn't tell all the rich pricks to stop raping their children in the middle of trying to found psychology as a field of study.
This is based on a very sketchy theory itself.
Psych studies are a cardhouse from top to bottom.
Sure it is, that's why no professional who has read his notes disagrees with the overall analysis that he covered up the extent of sexual abuse in his patients to save his career.
Still better than when he talks about the eels
I don't even want to know.
Dude’s thinkin w his dick, okay. Freud was raised by his nanny and had very little contact with his bio-mom. Reasonable to assume it was so little that he experienced her as a stranger, & thought she was hot.
Extremely unreasonable to consider any mammal would have sexual urges that would result in immediate severe inbreeding. Some past-centuries gooner got all hot, great, but don’t make me take his porn seriously
Girl on the right's diggin it though.
Girl on the left in the back too
There’s a reason him and Jung’s findings are ignored in favor of actual scientific discoveries.
Jung's findings have been debunked?
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Carl_Jung
To be more specific, Jung's psychology has been characterized as "unscientific" on the following grounds:
- that some Jungian concepts, such as archetypes and synchronicity, cannot be proven by the scientific method
- that Jung subscribed to a nineteenth-century notion of evolution that has since been discredited
- that Jung's valuation of the mental functions of feeling and intuition on the same level as thinking weakens the attitude of rational objectivity that is essential in scientific research
- that Jung's interest in occult traditions, including the pre-scientific European past (third-century Gnosticism and medieval alchemy) and contemporary Asian cultures (Taoism and Tibetan Buddhism) amounts to a glorification of mysticism and irrationality
- that Jung's clinical specialization in the treatment of schizophrenia and his own brush with psychosis made him an untrustworthy guide to "ordinary" reality
https://www.europeanmedical.info/cognitive-therapy/the-unscientific-nature-of-jungs-psychology.html
This is only 10% of the article dipshit. Some of these points are only theorized to be the case.
Also, I find it kind of funny. Scientific method is just a model with its own flaws and is bound to faliure in certain fields as all models do.
You aren’t much of a thinker, are ya?
🤷♀️
how do you feel about who has the burden of proof? the person claiming the thing or someone saying there is no evidence to suggest that the claim is correct?
See, the only issue with that explanation is that it didn't really introduce to the reader any of Jung's contributions or beliefs. But yeah, fuck spiritualists. This Jung guy would have been right at home in a modern Midwifery Association.
There’s lots more on the internet where that came from.
Thanks for the explanation.
How do you debunk a bunch of woo?
exactly.
Freud bullying someone in school: HEY THERE FATTY FACE, YOU'RE BIG AND FAT!!
Bullied kid: ....... your mom
Freud then spends his life trying to come up with a clever come back
"Really, you have to believe me, is not only me, ALL boys want to..."
"I do it too..... I ALWAYS think about your Mom when I'm having sex" - Joey from Friends.
Ok Siggy, maybe take it easy on the blow?
Have you seen Freud's mom? You'd start cranking out justifications too.
Hubba Hubba!
Hips for days
#🤤
you wildin'
The lefternmost girl looks like she is kinda into it.
She's the ten percent
"H-hey stepbro..."
Motherfucker
FUCK YOU! I'VE MOTHERFUCKED BEFORE AND I'LL MOTHERFUCK AGAIN! IM A SERIAL MOTHERFUCKER!