Christopher D. Green 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>
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
I agree with Chris. Freudian tenets should be described and then
it should be explained why they are *not* very influential today
in psychology.
Similarly, I spend time on Hullian tenets in my Learning class
because the concepts of motivation and drive have a widely-felt
influence on explanations of behavior in other parts of our culture.
Ken
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/
======================================
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor
Department of Psychology http://www.psych.appstate.edu
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608
USA
---------------------------------------------------------------
---
