UK arrested Tommy Robinson for reporting child-rape gangs that the government caters to. The UK banned reporting of his arrest, denied him a lawyer, and is trying to have him assassinated in prison. Regardless of how you feel about his views, this is a totalitarian government.

Tommy Robinson isn't the first to that the UK has jailed after a secret trial. Melanie Shaw tried to expose child abuse in a Nottinghamshire kids home -- it wasn't foreigners doing the molesting, but many members of the UK's parliament. The government kidnapped her child and permanently took it away. Police from 3 forces have treated her like a terrorist and themselves broken the law. Police even constantly come by to rob her phone and money. She was tried in a case so secret the court staff had no knowledge of it. Her lawyer, like Tommy's, wasn't present. She has been held for over 2 years in Peterborough Prison. read, read


From en-Rightpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Psychoanalysis, or psychiatric analysis, is part of the quack science of destroying people's minds, created by pseudoscientist Sigmund Freud, whose work later inspired cultural Marxism. One main flaw in psychoanalysis is that in its addressment of supposed mental problems it deals with they do not arise in the intellect, but it expects that the intellect (completely different parts and functions of the mind and brain) can alone fix them, often by merely being aware of them.

Other people whose work founded psychoanalysis included Josef Breuer, Alfred Adler, and Erich Fromm. Fromm was also associated with what became known as the Frankfurt School of critical theory.


The strongest reason for considering Freud a pseudo-scientist is that he claimed to have tested – and thus to have provided the most cogent grounds for accepting – theories which are either untestable or even if testable had not been tested. It is spurious claims to have tested an untestable or untested theory which are the most pertinent grounds for deeming Freud and his followers pseudoscientists...

Frank Cioffi[1]

Psychoanalysis has progressively moved towards the fringes of mental health care.[2] Its usefulness as a technique has not been demonstrated.[3] The theoretical foundations of psychoanalysis lay in the same philosophical currents that lead to interpretive phenomenology rather than in those that lead to scientific positivism, making the theory largely incompatible with scientific approaches to the study of the mind.[4]

Early critics of psychoanalysis believed that its theories were based too little on quantitative and experimental research, and too much on the clinical case study method. Some have accused Freud of fabrication, most famously in the case of Anna O. (Borch-Jacobsen 1996). Others have speculated that patients suffered from now easily identifiable conditions unrelated to psychoanalysis; for instance, Anna O. is thought to have suffered from tuberculous meningitis and not hysteria.[5]

E. Fuller Torrey, writing in Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists (1986), stated that psychoanalytic theories have no more scientific basis than the theories of traditional native healers, "witchdoctors" or modern "cult" alternatives such as est.[6] Frank Cioffi, author of Freud and the Question of Pseudoscience, cites false claims of a sound scientific verification of the theory and its elements as the strongest basis for classifying the work of Freud and his school as pseudoscience.[7]

Cognitive scientists have also criticized psychoanalysis. Linguist Noam Chomsky has criticized psychoanalysis for lacking a scientific basis.[8] Steven Pinker considered Freudian theory unscientific for understanding the mind.[9] Evolutionary biologist Steven Jay Gould considered psychoanalysis as influenced by pseudoscientific theories such as recapitulation theory. Evolutionary psychologist Kevin B. MacDonald[10] as well as psychologists Hans Eysenck[11] and John F. Kihlstrom[12] have also criticized the field as pseudoscience.

A French 2004 report from INSERM said that psychoanalytic therapy is far less effective than other psychotherapies (including cognitive behavioral therapy). It used a meta-analysis of numerous other studies to find whether the treatment was "proven" or "presumed" to be effective on different diseases. Numerous studies have shown that its efficacy is related to the quality of the therapist, rather than the psychoanalytic school or technique or training,.[13]

Both Freud and psychoanalysis have been criticized in very extreme terms.[14] Exchanges between critics and defenders of psychoanalysis have often been so heated that they have come to be characterized as the Freud Wars. Karl Popper argued that psychoanalysis is a pseudoscience because its claims are not testable and cannot be refuted; that is, they are not falsifiable.[15] Karl Kraus, an Austrian satirist, was the subject of a book written by noted libertarian author Thomas Szasz. The book Anti-Freud: Karl Kraus's Criticism of Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry, originally published under the name Karl Kraus and the Soul Doctors, portrayed Kraus as a harsh critic of Sigmund Freud and of psychoanalysis in general. Other commentators, such as Edward Timms, author of Karl Kraus – Apocalyptic Satirist, have argued that Kraus respected Freud, though with reservations about the application of some of his theories, and that his views were far less black-and-white than Szasz suggests. Grünbaum argues that psychoanalytic based theories are falsifiable, but that the causal claims of psychoanalysis are unsupported by the available clinical evidence. A prominent academic in positive psychology wrote that 'Thirty years ago, the cognitive revolution in psychology overthrew both Freud and the behaviorists, at least in academia. ... [T]hinking ... is not just a [result] of emotion or behavior. ... [E]motion is always generated by cognition, not the other way around.'[16]

Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze claimed that the institution of psychoanalysis has become a center of power and that its confessional techniques resemble the Christian tradition.[17] Jacques Lacan criticized the emphasis of some American and British psychoanalytical traditions on what he has viewed as the suggestion of imaginary "causes" for symptoms, and recommended the return to Freud.[18] Together with Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari criticised the Oedipal structure.[19] Luce Irigaray criticised psychoanalysis, employing Jacques Derrida's concept of phallogocentrism to describe the exclusion of the woman from Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalytical theories.[20]Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, in their 1972 work Anti-Œdipus, take the cases of Gérard Mendel, Bela Grunberger and Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel, prominent members of the most respected associations (IPa), to suggest that, traditionally, psychoanalysis enthusiastically embraces a police state.[21]

Many aspects of Freudian theory are indeed out of date, and they should be: Freud died in 1939, and he has been slow to undertake further revisions. His critics, however, are equally behind the times, attacking Freudian views of the 1920s as if they continue to have some currency in their original form. Psychodynamic theory and therapy have evolved considerably since 1939 when Freud's bearded countenance was last sighted in earnest. Contemporary psychoanalysts and psychodynamic therapists no longer write much about ids and egos, nor do they conceive of treatment for psychological disorders as an archaeological expedition in search of lost memories.

Drew Westen[22]

An increasing amount of empirical research from academic psychologists and psychiatrists has begun to address this criticism. A survey of scientific research suggested that while personality traits corresponding to Freud's oral, anal, Oedipal, and genital phases can be observed, they do not necessarily manifest as stages in the development of children. These studies also have not confirmed that such traits in adults result from childhood experiences (Fisher & Greenberg, 1977, p. 399). However, these stages should not be viewed as crucial to modern psychoanalysis. What is crucial to modern psychoanalytic theory and practice is the power of the unconscious and the transference phenomenon.

The idea of "unconscious" is contested because human behavior can be observed while human mental activity has to be inferred. However, the unconscious is now a popular topic of study in the fields of experimental and social psychology (e.g., implicit attitude measures, fMRI, and PET scans, and other indirect tests). The idea of unconscious, and the transference phenomenon, have been widely researched and, it is claimed, validated in the fields of cognitive psychology and social psychology (Westen & Gabbard 2002), though a Freudian interpretation of unconscious mental activity is not held by the majority of cognitive psychologists. Recent developments in neuroscience have resulted in one side arguing that it has provided a biological basis for unconscious emotional processing in line with psychoanalytic theory i.e., neuropsychoanalysis (Westen & Gabbard 2002), while the other side argues that such findings make psychoanalytic theory obsolete and irrelevant.

Shlomo Kalo explains that Materialism that flourished in the 19th Century severely harmed religion and rejected whatever called spiritual. The institution of the confession priest in particular was badly damaged. The empty void that this institution left behind was swiftly occupied by the newborn psychoanalysis. In his writings Kalo claims that psychoanalysis basic approach is erroneous. It represents the mainline wrong assumptions that happiness is unreachable and that the natural desire of a human being is to exploit his fellow men for his own pleasure and benefit.[23]

Freud's psychoanalysis was criticized by his wife, Martha. René Laforgue reported Martha Freud saying, "I must admit that if I did not realize how seriously my husband takes his treatments, I should think that psychoanalysis is a form of pornography." To Martha there was something vulgar about psychoanalysis, and she dissociated herself from it. According to Marie Bonaparte, Martha was upset with her husband's work and his treatment of sexuality.[24]

Jacques Derrida incorporated aspects of psychoanalytic theory into his theory of deconstruction in order to question what he called the 'metaphysics of presence'. Derrida also turns some of these ideas against Freud, to reveal tensions and contradictions in his work. For example, although Freud defines religion and metaphysics as displacements of the identification with the father in the resolution of the Oedipal complex, Derrida insists in The Postcard: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond that the prominence of the father in Freud's own analysis is itself indebted to the prominence given to the father in Western metaphysics and theology since Plato.[citation needed]

See also


  1. Frank Cioffi (November 9, 2005). "Was Freud a Pseudoscientist?". Retrieved April 13, 2011.
  2. "French Psychoflap". Science. 307 (5713): 1197a–1197a. 25 February 2005. doi:10.1126/science.307.5713.1197a. 
  3. Abbot (15 October 2009). "Psychology: a reality check". Nature. 461 (7266): 847–847. doi:10.1038/461847a. , as highlighted by Hansen, edited by Elizabeth M. Altmaier, Jo-Ida C. The Oxford handbook of counseling psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 71. ISBN 9780195342314. 
  4. Fuller Torrey E (1986), Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists, p. 76.
    • Popper KR, "Science: Conjectures and Refutations", reprinted in Grim P (1990). Philosophy of Science and the Occult, Albany, pp. 104–110. See also Conjectures and Refutations.
    • Webster, Richard (1996). Why Freud was wrong. Sin, science and psychoanalysis. London: Harper Collins.
  5. Webster, Richard (1996). Why Freud was wrong. Sin, science and psychoanalysis. London: Harper Collins.
  6. Fuller Torrey E (1986). Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists. p. 76. 
  7. Frank Cioffi (November 9, 2005). "Was Freud a Pseudoscientist?". Retrieved April 13, 2011. The strongest reason for considering Freud a pseudo-scientist is that he claimed to have tested – and thus to have provided the most cogent grounds for accepting – theories which are either untestable or even if testable had not been tested. It is spurious claims to have tested an untestable or untested theory which are the most pertinent grounds for deeming Freud and his followers pseudoscientists (though pseudo-hermeneut would have been a more apposite and felicitous description). 
  9. Pinker, Steven (1997). How The Mind Works.
  10. Psychoanalysis as religion, cult, and political movement. Skeptic, 4(3), 94–99. Reprinted in The Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, Michael Shermer (Ed.). ABC-CLIO, December 2002.
  11. Eysneck, Hans (1985). Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire
  12. Is Freud Still Alive? No, Not Really. John F. Kihlstrom
  13. Horvath A (2001). The Alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, research, practice, training. 38. pp. 365–372. doi:10.1037/0033-3204.38.4.365. 
  14. Brunner, José (2001). Freud and the politics of psychoanalysis. Transaction. p. xxi. ISBN 0-7658-0672-X. 
  15. Popper KR, "Science: Conjectures and Refutations", reprinted in Grim P (1990) Philosophy of Science and the Occult, Albany, pp. 104–110. See also Conjectures and Refutations.
  16. Seligman, Martin, Authentic Happiness (The Free Press, Simon & Schuster, 2002), at p64 (viewable for free on one or more well-known commercial booksellers on the Web, accessed 2011-May-12)
  17. Weeks, Jeffrey (1989). Sexuality and its Discontents: Meanings, Myths, and Modern Sexualities. New York: Routledge. p. 176. ISBN 0-415-04503-7. 
  18. Lacan J (1977). Ecrits. A Selection and The Seminars. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock. 
  19. Deleuze G, Guattari F (1984). Anti-Oedipus. London: Athlone. ISBN 0-485-30018-4. 
  20. Irigaray L (1974). Speculum. Paris: Minuit. ISBN 2-7073-0024-1. 
  21. Deleuze, Guattari (1972) Anti-Œdipus, section 2.4 The disjunctive synthesis of recording p.89
  22. Drew Westen, "The Scientific Legacy of Sigmund Freud Toward a Psychodynamically Informed Psychological Science". November 1998 Vol. 124, No. 3, 333-371
  23. Kalo, Shlomo Powerlessness as a Parable, 1997, D.A.T. Publ., p. 16 and backcover text
  24. Behling, Katja (2005). Martha Freud. Polity Press. pp. 164–165. ISBN 978-0-7456-3338-1. 


  • David Bakan - Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition
  • Karen E. Starr - Repair of the Soul, Metaphors of Transformation in Jewish Mysticism and Psychoanalysis
  • Stephen Frosh - Hate and the Jewish Science, Anti-Semitism, Nazism and Psychoanalysis
  • Veronika Fuechtner - Berlin Psychoanalytic, Psychoanalysis and Culture in Weimar Republic Germany and Beyond
  • Mikko Tuhkanen - The American Optic, Psychoanalysis, Critical Race Theory and Richard Wright
  • James Penney - The World of Perversion, Psychoanalysis and the Impossible Absolute of Desire

External links