----- Original Message -----
From: "Annette Taylor, Ph. D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 11:52 AM
Subject: Siggy support
> I think the statement below is very lopsided. Rather than suggest a
percentage
> I think it may be more informative to ask which aspects of Freud's
> theories are still taught, if for nothing else but their historical value
in
> the evolution of some modern concepts.
>
You are right in that my question is double-baralled. There could be no
evidence supporting Freud's ideas, but he still could be relevant to
psychology. But the issue of which aspects of his theories are still taught
is an entirely separate question from the one that interests me. For
example, I am very interested in Freudian theory, find it fascinating, of
immense historical and cultural significance, and so forth. And I
disbelieve almost all of it. Therefore it is relevant to my teaching of
psychology, but it may not be relevant to to psychology as a science. I'm
not interested in promoting this idea (that Freud is irrelevant) because I
think Freud has done a good job of that--I'm just curious what people think
about how other psychologists probably think.
For example, if an Intro Psych textbook came out whose Personality
chapter spent more time talking about Mischel and Friends, Big Three and
Five, Behavior Genetics, etc. than Freud and his followers, would this be
considered inappropriate given the immense relevance of Freud to the science
of psychology?
PO
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
