Paul Brandon wrote: > > > At 10:45 AM -0600 11/25/07, Beth Benoit wrote: >> From today's New York Times: >> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/weekinreview/25cohen.html?_r=1&ref=education&oref >> >> <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/weekinreview/25cohen.html?_r=1&ref=education&oref> > > As it should be (except in History of Psychology classes). Interesting that you would mention this because, although I have a session on psychoanalysis in my history of psychology course (and part of the discussion always revolves around whether it belongs there, or whether psychoanalysis is really a different discipline from psychology), it is not mentioned specifically in the university calendar course description, and so it would have been missed by this survey (even if had been offered in The Only Country That Counts).
Let me try something out on those of you who think that psychoanalysis should not be mentioned in psychology departments. This is from the "Those Who Do Not Know Their History Are Doomed To Repeat It" department. Psychoanalysis should indeed be described and discussed in courses that survey a variety of therapeutic approaches, if only because Freudian tenets are so widely felt in other parts of the culture and psychology students should be forewarned and forearmed about it so that they can discuss it intelligently with those who still use it as a model for interpretation (of literature, of other artforms, of life in general). Regards, Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-5115 ex. 66164 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ====================================== ---
