Fuller Torrey E (1986), Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists, p. 76.

E. Fuller Torrey, writin in Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists (1986), stated that psychoanalytic theories ha!e no "ore scienti#ic &8'( $asis than the theories o# traditional nati!e healers, %witchdoctors% or "odern %cult% alternati!es such as est. Fran) *io##i, author o# Freud and the Question of Pseudoscience, cites #alse clai"s o# a sound scienti#ic !eri#ication o# the theory and its ele"ents as the stron est $asis #or classi#yin the wor) o# Freud and his school as pseudoscience

Popper +,, %-cience. *on/ectures and ,e#utations%, reprinted in 0ri" P (1991). Philosophy of Science and the Occult, 2l$any, pp. 11'3111. -ee also Conjectures and Refutations . We$ster, ,ichard (1996). Why Freud was wrong. Sin, science and psychoanalysis . 4ondon. 5arper *ollins.

-o"e ha!e accused Freud o# #a$rication, "ost #a"ously in the case o# 2nna 6 ( 7orch89aco$sen 1996) 4in uist :oa" *ho"s)y has critici;ed psychoanalysis #or lac)in a scienti#ic $asis <:-E,= *ollecti!e E>pert ,eports &<nternet(.? Psychotherapy. Three approaches e!aluated

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7123/#A359 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7123/#A372
,ichard Feyn"an, If you loo at all of the co!plicated ideas that they ha"e de"eloped in an infinitesi!al a!ount of ti!e, if you co!pare to any other of the sciences how long it ta es to get one idea after the other, if you consider all the structures and in"entions and co!plicated things, the ids and the egos, the tensions and the forces, and the pushes and the pulls, I tell you they can#t all $e there. It#s too !uch for one $rain or a few $rains to ha"e coo ed up in such a short ti!e.
&9'(

. &T(hin)in ... is not /ust a &result( o# e"otion or $eha!ior. ... &E("otion is always enerated $y co nition, not the other way around ( -eli "an, =artin, 2uthentic 5appiness (The Free Press, -i"on @ -chuster, A11A), at p6' (!iewa$le #or #ree on one or "ore well8)nown
co""ercial $oo)sellers on the We$, accessed A1118=ay81A))

=ichel Foucault and 0illes Beleu;e clai"ed that the institution o# psychoanalysis has $eco"e a center o# power and that its con#essional techniCues rese"$le the *hristian tradition (Wee)s, 9e##rey (1989), Se%uality and its &iscontents' (eanings, (yths, and
(odern Se%ualities, :ew Dor). ,outled e, p. 176, <-7: 18'1E81'E1F87

2 sur!ey o# scienti#ic research su ested that while personality traits correspondin to FreudGs oral, anal, 6edipal, and enital phases can $e o$ser!ed, they do not necessarily "ani#est as sta es in the de!elop"ent o# children. These studies also ha!e not con#ir"ed that such traits in adults result #ro" childhood e>periences (Fisher @ 0reen$er , 1977, p. F99). the idea o# %unconscious% is contested $ecause hu"an $eha!ior can $e o$ser!ed while hu"an "ental acti!ity has to $e in#erred. 5owe!er, the unconscious is now a popular topic o# study in the #ields o# e>peri"ental and social psycholo y (e. ., i"plicit attitude "easures, #=,<, and PET scans, and other indirect tests). The idea o# unconscious, and the trans#erence pheno"enon, ha!e $een widely researched and, it is clai"ed, !alidated in the #ields o# co niti!e psycholo y and social psycholo y (Westen @ 0a$$ard A11A), thou h a Freudian interpretation o# unconscious "ental acti!ity is not held $y the "a/ority o# co niti!e psycholo ists. ,ecent de!elop"ents in neuroscience ha!e resulted in one side ar uin that it has pro!ided a $iolo ical $asis #or unconscious e"otional processin in line with psychoanalytic theory i.e., neuropsychoanalysis (Westen @ 0a$$ard A11A), while the other side ar ues that such #indin s "a)e psychoanalytic theory o$solete and irrele!ant.

,espondin to the statistical criticis" o# his pro/ecti!e test, 4eopold -;ondi said that his test actually disco!ers %#ate and e>istential possi$ilities hidden in the inherited #a"ilial uncounscious and the personal unconscious, e!en those hidden $ecause ne!er li!ed throu h or $ecause ha!e $een re/ected. <s any statistical "ethod ha$le to span, understand and inte rate "athe"atically all these possi$ilitiesH < deny this cathe orically For e>a"ple, an e>tensi!e line o# research conducted $y 5asher and Iac)s has de"onstrated that indi!iduals re ister in#or"ation a$out the #reCuency o# e!ents auto"atically (i.e., outside o# conscious awareness and without en a in conscious in#or"ation processin resources). =oreo!er, percei!ers do this unintentionally, truly %auto"atically,% re ardless o# the instructions they recei!e, and re ardless o# the in#or"ation processin oals they ha!e. <nterestin ly, the a$ility to unconsciously and relati!ely accurately tally the #reCuency o# e!ents appears to ha!e little or no relation to the indi!idualGs a e,
&'1(

&'A(

education, intelli ence, or personality, thus it "ay represent one o# the #unda"ental $uildin $loc)s o# hu"an orientation in the en!iron"ent and possi$ly the acCuisition o# procedural )nowled e and e>perience, in eneral. 5asher 4, Iac)s ,T (Bece"$er
198'). %2uto"atic processin o# #unda"ental in#or"ation. the case o# #reCuency o# occurrence%. )! Psychol 39(1A). 1F7A388. doi.11.11F7J111F8 166K.F9.1A.1F7A. P=<B 6F9E7''.

<n addition to this, 2llan 5o$son and collea ues ca"e up with the acti!ation8synthesis hypothesis which proposes that drea"s are si"ply the side e##ects o# the neural acti!ity in the $rain that produces $eta $rain wa!es durin ,E= sleep that are associated with wa)e#ulness. 2ccordin to this hypothesis, neurons #ire periodically durin sleep in the lower $rain le!els and thus send rando" si nals to the corte>. The corte> then synthesi;es a drea" in reaction to these si nals in order to try and "a)e sense o# why the $rain is sendin the". 5owe!er, the hypothesis does not state that drea"s are "eanin less, it /ust downplays the role that e"otional #actors play in deter"inin drea"s.
&F9(