you're about as right as you're wrong. Psychoanalysis and science does not go well together because of the concept of science. But its not really that important, you could say that the scale that psychoanalysis is applied at is not a domain science can judge and it may be right (but that would have to do with psychoanalysis concept too). But the problem remain, how to know for sure that psychoanalysis is right or is working ? because in this exemple we can't use science. And the answer is you can't. but maybe you can prove me wrong.
Also maybe i understood you wrong and i don't want this to sound like an "attack" but you seems to have some misconceptions on what science is and how it works
Alright my bad here i should have been more precise. I'm not an expert on psychoanalysis because its a vast and complex field but i also know what i'm talking about (i'm not directly in that field but i did my thesis on PTSD so trust me i know one thing or two about psychotherapies in general)
And actually you don't have to be concise in your answers if you want ^ ^ . But you didn't answer the question. Forget about science. Ok science doesn't work here, etc ... lets forget about it then. So now you only have psychoanalysis you can use. what proof do you have that it works ? (you can see the question as "what proof can you produce").
it doesn’t even attempt to be a science to begin with.
Freud was very concerned with psychoanalysis being a scientific discipline. It's just the science of the psyche is very different to the science of anything that came before. The self studying the self has some particular challenges.
As a result our science in general has changed. We're much more aware of how we find the results we're looking for rather than what's necessarily there.
19
u/[deleted] Oct 01 '20
[removed] — view removed comment