on 6/15/02 6:12 AM, Rick Froman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 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
Hi Rick, yes, that is essentially exactly what I say about Freud in my intro psych lectures. I make the point that a great part of his impact of the field is that his theories drew attention to the field (he, like John Watson, sure knew how to create controversy!), and drew others into psychology (either as followers, or to empirically test his speculations). cheers, Todd Todd D. Nelson, Ph.D. Gemperle Foundation Distinguished Professor Department of Psychology California State University 801 West Monte Vista Ave. Turlock, California 95382 Office: (209) 667-3442 FAX: (209) 664-7067 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.csustan.edu/psych/todd --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
