As to Freud's placement near the top of the list of most influential
psychologists of the 20th century, I have to say that my characterization of
Freud's theory as being not largely empirically-based should evidently not
be confused with the fact that it seems to have been very heuristic. It
seems that Freud would not be listed so high in both textbook references and
journal references without having had a great impact on research. What do
others think? Do you think I need to re-characterize my statements about
Freud's contribution to say that, although most of his theory is not
actually empirically-based, it was quite effective in encouraging others to
do research?

Rick Froman
John Brown University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 11:13 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Subject: Near-TIPSter in the NY Times and other stuff


I'm back. Just in time to catch Miguel Roig's fine contribution  to the
letters section of the New York Times and to alert the list to  the
appearance there of a contribution from another psychologist familiar to
most of us on TIPS. I speak of the admirable Judith Rich
Harris, who took the Times (or was it Raquel Welch, or Raquel Welch's
father?) to task for perpetuating a significant misunderstanding
concerning the importance of the family environment in language acquisition.
Her letter was published on June 14, and (for the
moment) is still available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/14/opinion/L14RAQU.html

I see that the NY Times identified JRH as "the author of a book about
children's development". That's like saying Karl Marx wrote a book
about economics (and that analogy is so deeply obscure I don't even
understand it myself). I've also noticed that she's now posted on
her website the fourth of a series of essays on birth order effects, a
perennial topic of discussion on this list. This time she takes on
Frank Sulloway's claims in "Born to Rebel". It's at:
http://xchar.home.att.net/tna/birth-order/methods.htm

Finally (I've been saving them up, I guess) I'd like to draw people's
attention to the last word on a favourite game: who are the  greatest
psychologists of the 20th century? The answer  is reported  in a new paper
by Haggbloom et al in _Review of General Psychology_,
available on-line at:
http://www.apa.org/journals/gpr/press_releases/june_2002/gpr62139.pdf

I think you'll be surprised by who gets the number 1 spot, and some may even
be outraged (not me). Unfortunately, though,  through
some unacountable oversight, my name seems to have been accidentally left
off the list.

-Stephen
______________________________________________________
Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.              tel:  (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
Department of Psychology             fax: (819) 822-9661
Bishop's University                 e-mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lennoxville, QC  J1M 1Z7
Canada

Department web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
Check out TIPS listserv for teachers of psychology at:
http://www.frostburg.edu/dept/psyc/southerly/tips
________________________________________________________


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to