<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Freud or Fraud</title>
	<atom:link href="http://schinckel.net/2006/06/20/freud-or-fraud/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://schinckel.net/2006/06/20/freud-or-fraud/</link>
	<description>Like a fortune cookie, only without the fortune, and not a cookie.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:59:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Schinckel</title>
		<link>http://schinckel.net/2006/06/20/freud-or-fraud/#comment-1267</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Schinckel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2006 01:29:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schinckel.blogsome.com/2006/06/20/freud-or-fraud/#comment-1267</guid>
		<description>I'm not so sure I agree with the "great weight" you discuss.  Granted, I only did the first year psychology subjects, but I found there was very litle respect for, and indeed mention of, Freud's theories.  (I'll use the term &lt;em&gt;theory &lt;/em&gt;loosely, since his ideas are largely unfalsifiable.)

As for the coherence argument, I'm not actually sure I even agree with you on this point.  The reading I have done on Freud indicates that his ideas are not in fact coherent.  In fact, often the totally wrong conclusion is drawn from a logically evident argument.  Similar, in fact, to the creationist conclusions, such as those presented in every Jehovah's Witness document ever written.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not so sure I agree with the &#8220;great weight&#8221; you discuss.  Granted, I only did the first year psychology subjects, but I found there was very litle respect for, and indeed mention of, Freud&#8217;s theories.  (I&#8217;ll use the term <em>theory </em>loosely, since his ideas are largely unfalsifiable.)</p>
<p>As for the coherence argument, I&#8217;m not actually sure I even agree with you on this point.  The reading I have done on Freud indicates that his ideas are not in fact coherent.  In fact, often the totally wrong conclusion is drawn from a logically evident argument.  Similar, in fact, to the creationist conclusions, such as those presented in every Jehovah&#8217;s Witness document ever written.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sensibilia</title>
		<link>http://schinckel.net/2006/06/20/freud-or-fraud/#comment-1266</link>
		<dc:creator>sensibilia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2006 18:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://schinckel.blogsome.com/2006/06/20/freud-or-fraud/#comment-1266</guid>
		<description>Freud is one of the most important thinkers of 20's century, and even today, a lot of his ideas have a great weight at psychological thinking. Not because are 'frauds', but because are coherent ideas, inspiring almost whole contemporary psychiatry</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Freud is one of the most important thinkers of 20&#8217;s century, and even today, a lot of his ideas have a great weight at psychological thinking. Not because are &#8216;frauds&#8217;, but because are coherent ideas, inspiring almost whole contemporary psychiatry</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
