Freud , the founder of modern psychology?

We have the divide of the biochemical model , vs the psychoanalytical model.

So what had the parent of modern psychology have to say about schizophrenia.

He though of schizophrenia as a form of narcissism.

An unfortunate statement when you consider all the people who trump psychology as a response over meds.

Is there any truth in what Freud said?


Yes, there was some truth; paranoid schizophrenia is a process of grandiose delusions followed by subsequent delusions of persecution for being grandiose. The hallucinations just feed the delusions. This is true and what Freud was describing. However, why would such a thing happen? Freud always had what are now silly explanations like “schizophrenic mothering styles”. No, it’s a genetic disorder and as of late relabeled a brain disease (Corrigan, 2003) by many in the field. The most politically correct of us call it a brain disease and not a “psychological” disorder; the evidence all clearly points to it being a neurodevelopmental disorder which means ■■■■■■ up maturation of the brain compared to healthy people. I could ramble quite a bit but it’s 5am and I’m awake from nightmares if you have any questions just ask


Yeah mouse agreed. I think many of the people who endlessly explore psychological treatment of schiz may not know what the founder of therapy had to say about the matter.

I think , people should ‘explore’ but there comes a time , where people need to put that stuff to one side and become ‘action’ focused.

Edit: 1

1 Like

Yeah I like theory but I want to see it applied not just lay dormant in the stacks of a library.

1 Like

Man your up late/early , when is your semester finished?

I literally just woke up from nightmares it’s like 5am here in Memphis. I am not thrilled about the ■■■■■■■ nightmares but I like to share what I know about psychology

Yep ,

I’m havn nostalgic dreams these days . I was dreamn I was havn a few beers in Australia , simple stuff , like ordering food , arriving in off the plane. I lived in bondi , burwood and stratfield. I’m back in Europe now , in real life for the last 7 years.

Dreams are weird.

Edit: crikey , its more , its 10 years back now.

Freud was engaged in an interpretative enterprise, a Freudian analysis can help a patient to make sense of his experiences by providing a framework in which they make sense. It provides a (new) perspective on the phenomena, it persuades the patient to see them differently. This can give a relief for the experiences can be very confusing. Yet it is to be distinguished from a scientific causal explanation of these experiences - a distinction Freud himself failed to perceive consistently as he maintained he was giving causal explanations. Yet his ‘causes’ were hypothetical and unidentifiable in a scientific manner. How is a an unconsciouss wish to be identified scientifically to test, again and again, its effects? The power of such talk lies in the patient accepting it as a reason for his/her beliefs, after the fact of the matter, so to speak. Similar to us motivating our actions and beliefs in retrospect much of the time. Freud can help to invent such motives that help us tell a coherent and sensible story - but it has nothing to do with testable causes that appear in a scientific theory. That is not to discredit the enterprise, interpretation can be a respectable undertaking.

Jung was by far the better psychologist - he described psychosis as the overwhelming of the conscious mind by the content of the unconscious - as psychic disturbance/overwhelm. & as an ego problem concerning self identity with understandings/realities of the soul. Pointless to try & discuss with materialists. & it was all denied, suppressed & rejected by the mainstream (& still is)

1 Like

But it’s technically pseudoscience and neuroscience has answered many of his questions. However, Freud was onto something, something which was beyond his time.

Not to discredit him, just to keep what he said in the context of when he said it- before the dawn of brain scans and antipsychotic drugs. His guess was as good as any, in my opinion, if not better because he described what he observed like a real clinician would. He observed a bunch of upper and middle class Victorian women for the most part…in Austria. Like 100 years ago.

1 Like

You seem convinced by labels and in particular with the word ‘materialism’. I’m letting you and the readers know what a very important seminal figure in the field though about the condition.

They can Google it themselves.

If you feel that biomedical psychiatry & materialistic science has solved the question of madness & explained the nature of the self & reality - then that is your prerogative. i don’t personally think it has.

There is no known aetiology for any functional mental health condition, & beyond theory no more is really known about any of it than 300 years ago.

The World, society & culture is currently dominated with a materialism paradigm, especially the establishment & many of our institutions, & has been for the past 300 years since the Enlightenment. That is just pointing out the reality/facts of it all.

i have studied Freud - some of it is OK, i also think he was very limited in what he said, he was very in line with the orthodox, which is why he was accepted over Jung. There is also a lot of advances within all these areas since the founders of modern Western psychology.

i’m getting a bit tired of your absolutely phoney meaningless views on the subject of science and ‘materialism’. You need to know something , if you can not ‘measure’ something , then its just ‘theory’ , if something is ‘imeasurable’ , then it is just ‘theory’ , until it’s ‘measured’ and ‘verified’. That is what science is and no other bullcrap. If something is both ‘imeasurable’ and ‘immaterial’ then don’t expect any of the rest of us to give a hoot.

1 Like

You have just described materialism. Materialism doesn’t disprove the non-physical.

The fact is that genuine science isn’t materialism. There is a long tradition of science that studies the non-physical.

Materialism doesn’t explain madness - it hasn’t answered the questions of the mind/consciousness - it in fact very largely rejects the entire thing & refuses to acknowledge those areas.

Tell me what actual proof/evidence there is that any functional mental health disorders are primarily brain conditions? Tell me what evidence there is that the brain creates & is the mind/consciousness? - Beyond conjecture, theory & assumptions. You can’t - because zero scientific materialist proof/evidence exists to state the mind/consciousness is the brain,

What is ‘genuine’ science , I’ve told you what science is , your only fooln yourself bro.

Well it’s not materialism - it’s a method for the study of reality. Look into the philosophy of science - get properly educated.

i’m Not the one who has been fooled - you can be 100% sure of that.

Well then ‘define’ it? What is genuine science?

Have above. it’s a method for the study of reality.

Ahh then , something that can’t be defined , measured and is immaterial to boot. That settles it.