This paper focuses on Freud's revolutionary theory of psychoanalysis and whether

psychoanalysis should be considered a "great" idea in personality. The fundamental

principles of the theory are developed and explained. In addition, the views of experts

are reviewed, and many of the criticisms and strengths of various aspects of Freud's

theory are examined and explained. Upon consideration, the author considers

psychoanalysis to be a valuable theory despite its weaknesses because it is

comprehensive, serendipitous, innovative, and has withstood the test of time.

Consequently, the author contends that psychoanalysis is indeed a "great" idea in

personality.
 
 
 
 

As a therapy, psychoanalysis is based on the concept that individuals are unaware of the many

factors that cause their behavior and emotions. These unconscious factors have the potential to

produce unhappiness, which in turn is expressed through a score of distinguishable symptoms,

including disturbing personality traits, difficulty in relating to others, or disturbances in self-esteem or

general disposition (American Psychoanalytic Association, 1998).

Psychoanalytic treatment is highly individualized and seeks to show how the unconscious factors

affect behavior patterns, relationships, and overall mental health. Treatment traces the unconscious

factors to their origins, shows how they have evolved and developed over the course of many years,

and subsequently helps individuals to overcome the challenges they face in life (National

Psychological Association for Psychoanalysis, 1998).

In addition to being a therapy, psychoanalysis is a method of understanding mental functioning and

the stages of growth and development. Psychoanalysis is a general theory of individual human

behavior and experience, and it has both contributed to and been enriched by many other disciplines.

Psychoanalysis seeks to explain the complex relationship between the body and the mind and

furthers the understanding of the role of emotions in medical illness and health. In addition,

psychoanalysis is the basis of many other approaches to therapy. Many insights revealed by

psychoanalytic treatment have formed the basis for other treatment programs in child psychiatry,

family therapy, and general psychiatric practice (Farrell, 1981, p. 202).

The value and validity of psychoanalysis as a theory and treatment have been questioned since its

inception in the early 1900s. Critics dispute many aspects of psychoanalysis including whether or not

it is indeed a science; the value of the data upon which Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, based

his theories; and the method and effectiveness of psychoanalytic treatment. There has been much

criticism as well as praise regarding psychoanalysis over the years, but a hard look at both the

positive and negative feedback of critics of psychoanalysis shows, in my opinion, that psychoanalysis

is indeed a "great idea" in personality that should not be overlooked.

The Origins of Psychoanalysis

Sigmund Freud was the first psychoanalyst and a true pioneer in the recognition of the importance of

unconscious mental activity. His theories on the inner workings of the human mind, which seemed so

revolutionary at the turn of the century, are now widely accepted by most schools of psychological

thought. In 1896, Freud coined the term "psychoanalysis," and for the next forty years of his life, he

worked on thoroughly developing its main principles, objectives, techniques, and methodology.

Freud's many writings detail many of his thoughts on mental life, including the structural theory of the

mind, dream interpretation, the technique of psychoanalysis, and assorted other topics. Eventually

psychoanalysis began to thrive, and by 1925, it was established around the world as a flourishing

movement. Although for many years Freud had been considered a radical by many in his profession,

he was soon accepted and well-known worldwide as a leading expert in psychoanalysis (Gay, 1989,

p. xii). In 1939, Freud succumbed to cancer after a lifetime dedicated to psychological thought and

the development of his many theories (Gay, 1989, p. xx).

Although Freud's life had ended, he left behind a legacy unmatched by any other, a legacy that

continues very much to this day. Whereas new ideas have enriched the field of psychoanalysis and

techniques have adapted and expanded over the years, psychoanalysts today, like Freud, believe

that psychoanalysis is the most effective method of obtaining knowledge of the mind. Through

psychoanalysis, patients free themselves from terrible mental anguish and achieve greater

understanding of themselves and others.

Principles of Freud's Theory of Psychoanalysis

In An Outline of Psychoanalysis, Freud (1949) explains the principal tenets on which

psychoanalytic theory is based. He begins with an explanation of the three forces of the psychical

apparatus--the id, the ego, and the superego. The id has the quality of being unconscious and

contains everything that is inherited, everything that is present at birth, and the instincts (Freud, 1949,

p. 14). The ego has the quality of being conscious and is responsible for controlling the demands of

the id and of the instincts, becoming aware of stimuli, and serving as a link between the id and the

external world. In addition, the ego responds to stimulation by either adaptation or flight, regulates

activity, and strives to achieve pleasure and avoid unpleasure (Freud, 1949, p. 14-15). Finally, the

superego, whose demands are managed by the id, is responsible for the limitation of satisfactions and

represents the influence of others, such as parents, teachers, and role models, as well as the impact

of racial, societal, and cultural traditions (Freud, 1949, p. 15).

Freud states that the instincts are the ultimate cause of all behavior. The two basic instincts are Eros

(love) and the destructive or death instinct. The purpose of Eros is to establish and preserve unity

through relationships. On the other hand, the purpose of the death instinct is to undo connections and

unity via destruction (Freud, 1949, p. 18). The two instincts can either operate against each other

through repulsion or combine with each other through attraction (Freud, 1949, p. 19).

Freud (1949) contends that sexual life begins with manifestations that present themselves soon after

birth (p. 23). The four main phases in sexual development are the oral phase, the sadistic-anal phase,

the phallic phase, and the genital phase, and each phase is characterized by specific occurrences.

During the oral phase, the individual places emphasis on providing satisfaction for the needs of the

mouth, which emerges as the first erotogenic zone (Freud, 1949, p. 24). During the sadistic-anal

phase, satisfaction is sought through aggression and in the excretory function. During the phallic

phase, the young boy enters the Oedipus phase where he fears his father and castration while

simultaneously fantasizing about sexual relations with his mother (Freud, 1949, p. 25). The young

girl, in contrast, enters the Electra phase, where she experiences penis envy, which often culminates

in her turning away from sexual life altogether. Following the phallic phase is a period of latency, in

which sexual development comes to a halt (Freud, 1949, p. 23). Finally, in the genital phase, the

sexual function is completely organized and the coordination of sexual urge towards pleasure is

completed. Errors occurring in the development of the sexual function result in homosexuality and

sexual perversions, according to Freud (1949, p. 27).

Freud (1949) defines the qualities of the psychical process as being either conscious, preconscious,

or unconscious (p. 31). Ideas considered to be conscious are those of which we are aware, yet they

remain conscious only briefly. Preconscious ideas are defined as those that are capable of becoming

conscious. In contrast, unconscious ideas are defined as those that are not easily accessible but can

be inferred, recognized, and explained through analysis (Freud, 1949, p. 32).

Freud spent many years hypothesizing about the role of dreams and their interpretation. He defines

the states of sleep to be a period of uproar and chaos during which the unconscious thoughts of the

id attempt to force their way into consciousness (Freud, 1949, p. 38). In order to interpret a dream,

which develops from either the id or the ego, certain assumptions must be made, including the

acknowledgment that what is recalled from a dream is only a facade behind which the meaning must

be inferred. Dreams are undoubtedly caused by conflict and are characterized by their power to

bring up memories that the dreamer has forgotten, their strong use of symbolism, and their ability to

reproduce repressed impressions of the dreamer's childhood (Freud, 1949, p. 40). In addition,

dreams, which are fulfillments of wishes, according to Freud (1949), are capable of bringing up

impressions that cannot have originated from the dreamer's life (Freud, 1949, p. 45).

The basic objective of psychoanalysis is to remove neuroses and thereby cure patients by returning

the damaged ego to its normal state (Freud, 1949, p. 51). During analysis, a process that often takes

many years, patients tell analysts both what they feel is important and what they consider to be

unimportant. An aspect of analysis that has both positive and negative repercussions is transference,

which occurs when patients view their analysts as parents, role models, or other figures from their

past. Transference causes patients to become concerned with pleasing their analysts and, as a result,

patients lose their rational aim of getting well (Freud, 1949, p. 52).

The method of psychoanalysis involves several significant steps. First, analysts gather material with

which to work from patients' free associations, results of transference, dream interpretation, and the

patients' slips and parapraxes (Freud, 1949, p. 56). Second, analysts begin to form hypotheses

about what happened to the patients in the past and what is currently happening to them in their daily

life. It is important that analysts relay the conclusions at which they arrive based on their observations

only after the patients have reached the same conclusions on their own accord. Should analysts

reveal their conclusions to patients too soon, resistance due to repression occurs. Overcoming this

resistance requires additional time and effort by both the analysts and the patients. Once patients

accept the conclusions, they are cured (Freud, 1949, p. 57).

In the final chapters of An Outline of Psychoanalysis, Freud (1949) insists that it is neither practical

nor fair to scientifically define what is normal and abnormal, and despite his theory's accuracy,

"reality will always remain unknowable" (p. 83). He claims that although his theory is correct to the

best of his knowledge, "it is unlikely that such generalizations can be universally correct" (Freud,

1949, p. 96).

Evaluating the Criticisms of Psychoanalysis

In his "Précis of The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique," Grünbaum

(1986) asserts that "while psychoanalysis may thus be said to be scientifically alive, it is currently

hardly well" (p. 228). The criticisms of Freud's theory can be grouped into three general categories.

First, critics contend that Freud's theory is lacking in empirical evidence and relies too heavily on

therapeutic achievements, whereas others assert that even Freud's clinical data are flawed,

inaccurate, and selective at best. Second, the actual method or techniques involved in

psychoanalysis, such as Freud's ideas on the interpretation of dreams and the role of free

association, have been criticized. Finally, some critics assert that psychoanalysis is simply not a

science and many of the principles upon which it is based are inaccurate.

Criticisms of Freud's Evidence

Grünbaum (1986) believes that the reasoning on which Freud based his entire psychoanalytic theory

was "fundamentally flawed, even if the validity of his clinical evidence were not in question" but that

"the clinical data are themselves suspect; more often than not, they may be the patient's responses to

the suggestions and expectations of the analyst" (p. 220). Grünbaum (1986) concludes that in order

for psychoanalytic hypotheses to be validated in the future, data must be obtained from extraclinical

studies rather than from data obtained in a clinical setting (p. 228). In other words, Grünbaum and

other critics assert that psychoanalysis lacks in empirical data (Colby, 1960, p. 54).

Other critics disagree with Grünbaum and insist that although extraclinical studies must and should be

performed, clinical data are a reliable and necessary source of evidence because the theory of

psychoanalysis would be impossible to test otherwise (Edelson, 1986, p. 232). Shevrin (1986)

insists that "Freud's admirable heuristic hypotheses did not come out of the thin air or simply out of

his imagination" (p.258) as other critics might have the reader believe. Instead, Shevrin (1986)

continues, "extraclinical methods must be drawn upon in addition to the clinical method because the

clinical method is the only way we can be in touch with certain phenomena" (p. 259). Only with

quantification, many critics assert, can supposedly scientific theories even begin to be evaluated

based on their empirical merits.

Additional critics contend that Freud's clinical data are flawed or invalid. Greenberg (1986) believes

that Freud's case studies do not place enough stress on revealing the outcome of the treatment and

that Freud's aim was more to illustrate his theoretical points (p. 240). In addition, Freud fully

presented only twelve cases, but he mentioned over one hundred minor cases. Greenberg asserts

that many of the presented cases would not even be considered acceptable examples of

psychoanalysis and, in short, that virtually all of the case studies had basic shortcomings (p. 240).

Finally, Greenberg finds it "both striking and curious" (p. 240) that Freud chose to illustrate the

usefulness of psychoanalysis through the display of unsuccessful cases. "We were forced to

conclude," maintains Greenberg, "that Freud never presented any data, in statistical or case study

form, that demonstrated that his treatment was of benefit to a significant number of the patients he

himself saw" (p. 241). Many other powerful criticisms about Freud's inaccurate and subsequently

flawed evidence have been published. These critics contend that Freud's evidence is flawed due to

the lack of an experiment, the lack of a control group, and the lack of observations that went

unrecorded (Colby, 1960, p. 54). In addition, critics find fault with the demographically restricted

sample of individuals on which Freud based the majority of his data and theory (Holt, 1986, p. 242).

Criticisms of Freud's Technique

"Free association" is a method employed in psychoanalysis where the patients speak about any

subject matter whatsoever and the analyst draws conclusions based on what is said. According to

Storr (1986), "Grünbaum forcefully argues that free association is neither free nor validating evidence

for psychoanalytic theory" (p. 260). "For my own part, however," Grünbaum (1986) concludes, "I

find it unwarranted to use free association to validate causal inferences" (p. 224). Grünbaum (1986)

contends that free association is not a valid method of accessing the patients' repressed memories

because there is no way of ensuring that the analyst is capable of distinguishing between the patients'

actual memories and imagined memories constructed due to the influence of the analyst's leading

questions (p. 226).

Spence (1986) is critical of Grünbaum's argument, although he acknowledges that

we simply do not know the amount of contamination, the spread of infection within the

session, and the extent to which suggested responses are balanced by unexpected

confirmations which support the theory and take the analyst by surprise. (p. 259)

Spence contends that free associations are not necessarily contaminated and also makes note of the

fact that psychoanalysts "are particularly sensitized (in the course of their training) to the dangers of

suggestion, and schooled in a tradition which places an emphasis on minimal comment and redundant

examples" (p. 259). Spence concludes that the answer to the important question concerning the

validity of free association will only be realized through close inspection of the transcripts of meetings

between the patient and analyst.

In addition to his criticism of free association, Grünbaum (1986) finds fault with Freud's theory of

dreams. In spite of Freud's view that this theory represented his greatest insight and success, it has

very much failed in the eyes of most of today's critics.

Finally, many people feel that a major flaw of psychoanalysis is that, according to Farrell (1981), "it

appears to encourage analytic and psychodynamic practitioners to overlook the place and great

importance of ordinary common sense".
 

BACK TO THE INDEX PAGE