Back
to top
Should Psychoanalysis theory be taught as part of a Psychology degree?
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Why or why not? Also is a psychology degree right for me if I am interested in psychoanalysists like Lacan, Jung and psychologists such as Vygostsky? Are these guys mentioned at all? If not, then what is?
0
reply
Report
#2
A degree in psychology isn't for you if you're interested in psychoanalysis - it's only briefly mentioned in developmental psychology and it's not taken very seriously by other modules. Psychologists that are studied are mostly those who aren't from the psychoanalysis/old psychology fields. As for whether it should, I personally say no. It's not scientific and a lot of the theories are plain absurd.
1
reply
Report
#3
I suppose historically I would like to see psychoanalysis briefly explained, and its role in the development of modern psychology considered. However, my understanding is that DannyYYYY is correct and it will be covered tangentially in most cases. As for what you will study, it will depend on your module choices. I'm quite sure that you will be able to find this information on university websites and, failing that, you will certainly be able to find recommend reading lists which can help guide your Wikipedia journeys,
0
reply
(Original post by DannyYYYY)
A degree in psychology isn't for you if you're interested in psychoanalysis - it's only briefly mentioned in developmental psychology and it's not taken very seriously by other modules. Psychologists that are studied are mostly those who aren't from the psychoanalysis/old psychology fields. As for whether it should, I personally say no. It's not scientific and a lot of the theories are plain absurd.
A degree in psychology isn't for you if you're interested in psychoanalysis - it's only briefly mentioned in developmental psychology and it's not taken very seriously by other modules. Psychologists that are studied are mostly those who aren't from the psychoanalysis/old psychology fields. As for whether it should, I personally say no. It's not scientific and a lot of the theories are plain absurd.
so current psychologists tend to disregard most of their historic roots because the scientific communities considers it unscientific? I get that our politically correct universities may find psychoanalysis tough to swallow. However I see no reason why old psychologist such as Vygotsky, and early psychologist/philosophers such as Husserl, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche shouldn't be studied in something like "history of psychology" or "philosophy of psychology". Just my two cents.
Here's a speculative consideration — I see psychology being peer pressured in the scientific community: for a long time psychology was considered a joke. Too unscientific, not real science. Because of that, modern scholars in the field tend to almost ignore the discipline's history and former thinkers and instead cozy up with neuroscience – a respected science in the community.
Lastly, just a question: have you ever heard of Vygotsky in any of your classes?
0
reply
Report
#5
Its not uncommon to come accross thinkers like Vygotsky and Freud in a psych degree. It really depends on the modules that you study, and whether you do a module in the history of psychology or if some classes are more history based.
I don't think you can reduce it down to peer pressure though
I don't think you can reduce it down to peer pressure though
0
reply
Report
#6
(Original post by Gabrielxucram)
so current psychologists tend to disregard most of their historic roots because the scientific communities considers it unscientific? I get that our politically correct universities may find psychoanalysis tough to swallow. However I see no reason why old psychologist such as Vygotsky, and early psychologist/philosophers such as Husserl, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche shouldn't be studied in something like "history of psychology" or "philosophy of psychology". Just my two cents.
Here's a speculative consideration — I see psychology being peer pressured in the scientific community: for a long time psychology was considered a joke. Too unscientific, not real science. Because of that, modern scholars in the field tend to almost ignore the discipline's history and former thinkers and instead cozy up with neuroscience – a respected science in the community.
Lastly, just a question: have you ever heard of Vygotsky in any of your classes?
so current psychologists tend to disregard most of their historic roots because the scientific communities considers it unscientific? I get that our politically correct universities may find psychoanalysis tough to swallow. However I see no reason why old psychologist such as Vygotsky, and early psychologist/philosophers such as Husserl, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche shouldn't be studied in something like "history of psychology" or "philosophy of psychology". Just my two cents.
Here's a speculative consideration — I see psychology being peer pressured in the scientific community: for a long time psychology was considered a joke. Too unscientific, not real science. Because of that, modern scholars in the field tend to almost ignore the discipline's history and former thinkers and instead cozy up with neuroscience – a respected science in the community.
Lastly, just a question: have you ever heard of Vygotsky in any of your classes?
I haven't personally found it to be pressure from the scientific community, though that's just the lecturers at my university.
We have covered Vygotsky in both developmental and social, though we're going to be covering his theories more in advanced developmental psych.
0
reply
Report
#7
in any BPS accredited degree you'll cover lots of things, it's normal to prefer some approaches compared to others, but psychoanalysis isn't a big focus point... I covered Freud, Vygotsky, Jung at various points with relation to child development and in a history of psychology module
you may find that when you start studying psychology properly that you are more interested than you think in other approaches
as others have said, I think the current proportions are sensible, psychoanalysis was a major theory and is worth studying, but not as a major approach in the same way as biology or something is studied
you may find that when you start studying psychology properly that you are more interested than you think in other approaches
as others have said, I think the current proportions are sensible, psychoanalysis was a major theory and is worth studying, but not as a major approach in the same way as biology or something is studied
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
