DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

LUCKNOW
2015-16

PSYCHOLOGY
FINAL DRAFT ON:
PSYCHOANALYSIS: CRITICISM

SUBMITTED TO:

SUBMITTED BY:

Miss ISHA YADAV

SHUAIB AHMED SAIFI

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR

SEM-I, ROLL NO.-136

1

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the project work entitled PSYCHOLOGY: CRITICISM

submitted to the Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, is a record of an original
work done by me under the guidance of Miss Isha Yadav, Associate Professor, and this project
work is submitted in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.). The results embodied in this thesis have not been submitted to any other
University or Institute for the award of any degree or diploma.

-Shuaib Ahmed Saifi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This draft would not have been possible without the kind support and help of many individuals. I
would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of them. I am highly indebted to Miss Isha Yadav
for her guidance and constant supervision. I am grateful to my parents for their kind co-operation
and encouragement. Also, I am grateful to my colleagues who helped me out in its development
and all the other people who have willingly helped me out with their abilities.

Yours sincerely,
Shuaib Ahmed Saifi

Contents
DECLARATION.............................................................................................................................2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...............................................................................................................3
Psychoanalysis: Freud's Revolutionary Approach to Human Personality.......................................5
The Origins of Psychoanalysis........................................................................................................7
Principles of Freud's Theory of Psychoanalysis..............................................................................8
Evaluating the Criticisms of Psychoanalysis.................................................................................11
Criticisms of Freud's Evidence......................................................................................................11
Criticisms of Freud's Technique....................................................................................................12
Criticisms of the Principles of Psychoanalysis..............................................................................13
Evaluating the Strengths of Psychoanalysis..................................................................................16
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................18
References......................................................................................................................................19

Psychoanalysis: Freud's Revolutionary Approach to Human

Personality

This project 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 selfesteem 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 sadisticanal 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
8

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).
9

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).

10

Evaluating the Criticisms of Psychoanalysis

In his "Prcis of The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique," Grnbaum
(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

Grnbaum (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). Grnbaum (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, Grnbaum and other critics assert that psychoanalysis lacks in empirical data
(Colby, 1960, p. 54).
Other critics disagree with Grnbaum 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,
11

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), "Grnbaum forcefully argues that free association is neither free nor validating
evidence for psychoanalytic theory" (p. 260). "For my own part, however," Grnbaum (1986)
concludes, "I find it unwarranted to use free association to validate causal inferences" (p. 224).
Grnbaum (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
12

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 Grnbaum'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, Grnbaum (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" (p. 216). Because psychoanalysis deals chiefly with
unconscious motives and repressed emotions, common sense no longer seems to be applicable.
Farrell (1981) and other critics believe that it is increasingly important for analysts to be aware of
common sense and the role that it can, should, and does play in psychoanalysis (p. 216).

Criticisms of the Principles of Psychoanalysis

Storr (1981) insists, "Only a few fundamentalist psychoanalysts of an old-fashioned kind think
that Freud was a scientist or that psychoanalysis was or could be a scientific enterprise," and that,
"...to understand persons cannot be a scientific enterprise" (p. 260). Although many

13

psychoanalysts themselves would undoubtedly consider psychoanalysis to be a science, many

critics would disagree.
Popper, by far one of psychoanalysis' most well-known critics and a strong critic of Grnbaum,
insists that psychoanalysis cannot be considered a science because it is not falsifiable. He claims
that psychoanalysis' "so-called predictions are not predictions of overt behavior but of hidden
psychological states. This is why they are so untestable" (Popper, 1986, p. 254). Popper (1986)
claims that only when individuals are not neurotic is it possible to empirically determine if
prospective patients are currently neurotic (p. 254). Popper (1986) asserts that psychoanalysis
has often maintained that every individual is neurotic to some degree due to the fact that
everyone has suffered and repressed a trauma at one point or another in his or her life (p. 255).
However, this concept of ubiquitous repression is impossible to test because there is no overt
behavioral method of doing so (p. 254).
Other critics claim that psychoanalysis cannot be considered a science due to its lack of
predictions. Psychoanalysts, critics maintain, state that certain childhood experiences, such as
abuse or molestation, produce certain outcomes or states of neurosis. To take this idea one step
further, one should be able to predict that if children experience abuse, for instance, they will
become characterized by certain personality traits. In addition, this concept would theoretically
work in reverse. For instance, if individuals are observed in a particular neurotic state, one
should be able to predict that they had this or that childhood experience. However, neither of
these predictions can be made with any accuracy (Colby, 1960, p. 55).
Additional critics insist that psychoanalysis is not a science because of the lack of interpretive
rules or regulations. Colby (1960) contends that critics of psychoanalysis have difficulties with
the idea that "there are no clear, intersubjectively shared lines of reasoning between theories and
observations" (p. 54). For instance, one psychoanalyst will observe one phenomenon and
interpret it one way, whereas another psychoanalyst will observe the same phenomenon and
interpret it in a completely different way that is contradictory to the first psychoanalyst's
interpretation (Colby, 1960, p. 54). Colby (1960) concludes that if analysts themselves cannot
concur that a certain observation is an example of a certain theory, then the regulations that
govern psychoanalytic interpretation are undependable (p. 55).
14

Eysenck (1986) maintains:

I have always taken it for granted that the obvious failure of Freudian therapy to significantly
improve on spontaneous remission or placebo treatment is the clearest proof we have of the
inadequacy of Freudian theory, closely followed by the success of alternative methods of
treatment, such as behavior therapy. (p. 236)
Whereas critics, such as Popper (1986), insist that Freud's theories cannot be falsified and
therefore are not scientific, Eysenck claims that because Freud's theories can be falsified, they
are scientific. Grnbaum (1986) concurs with Eysenck that Freud's theory is falsifiable and
therefore scientific, but he goes one step further and claims that Freud's theory of psychoanalysis
has been proven wrong and is simply bad science.

15

Evaluating the Strengths of Psychoanalysis

In order to evaluate the strengths of Freud's theory of psychoanalysis, one must consider a few of
the qualities that make a theory of personality or behavior "great." Among the many qualities that
people consider to be important are that the theory addresses its problem, can be applied in
practical ways, fits with other theories, and withstands the test of time. In addition, a good
theory, according to many philosophers of science, is falsifiable, able to be generalized, leads to
new theories and ideas, and is recognized by others in the field. Clearly psychoanalysis meets
many of these criteria.
As noted previously, Freud coined the term "psychoanalysis" in 1856. Even today, as we are
rapidly approaching the twenty-first century, psychoanalysis remains as a valid option for
patients suffering from mental illnesses. The acceptance and popularity of psychoanalysis is
apparent through the existence of numerous institutes, organizations, and conferences established
around the world with psychoanalysis as their focus. The theory of psychoanalysis was
innovative and revolutionary, and clearly has withstood the test of time.
Perhaps even more noteworthy than the longevity of psychoanalysis is the fact that it has served
as a catalyst to many professionals in the field of psychology and prompted them to see
connections that they otherwise would have missed. Psychoanalysis enlightened health
professionals about many aspects of the human mind and its inner workings, phenomena that had
previously been inexplicable. As a direct result of psychoanalysis, approaches to psychological
treatment now considered routine or commonplace were developed worldwide (Farrell, 1981, p.
202).
By far one of the greatest strengths of psychoanalysis is that it is a very comprehensive theory.
Psychoanalysis, originally intended as a theory to explain therapeutic or psychological concepts,
explains the nature of human development and all aspects of mental functioning. However, many
experts contend that psychoanalysis can also be used to describe or explain a vast array of other
concepts outside of the realm of the psychological field. For example, religion, Shakespeare's
character "Hamlet," the nature of companies and their leaders, or an artist's paintings can all be
16

explained by the principles of psychoanalysis. This comprehensiveness suggests that the theory
of psychoanalysis is, at least to some extent, pointing in the general direction of the truth (Farrell,
1981, p. 195).

17

Conclusion
I concur with the many critics who insist upon the invalidity of Freud's evidence due to the lack
of empirical data and the demographically restricted sample of individuals on which Freud based
the majority of his ideas. Like Farrell (1981), I agree that sometimes it appears as if common
sense does not have a place in psychoanalytic theory and, as a result, I believe irrelevant and
false assumptions are made all too frequently. In addition, parts of Freudian theory are too
generalized and fail to leave adequate room for exceptions to the general rule. Finally, I find it
hard to accept that all mental problems stem from issues concerning aspects of sex, such as
unresolved Oedipal and Electra complexes. I believe that this is a gross exaggeration and
overgeneralization.
Despite the weaknesses of psychoanalysis, I believe that the many strengths of the theory are
extremely significant. Therefore, I maintain that psychoanalysis is a theory that should not be
disregarded. Because psychoanalysis was developed a century ago and is still considered to be a
credible and effective method of treating mental illnesses, I contend that at least significant parts
of the theory are accurate. Second, I believe that psychoanalysis is a scientific theory due to the
fact that it is falsifiable and has, in fact, been proven false because other methods of treatment
have been proven effective. Third, I believe that psychoanalysis is comprehensive, can be
applied in practical ways, and contains valid arguments. Finally, I believe that psychoanalysis is
a substantial theory of personality because it is directly responsible for the development of
additional psychological theories and hypotheses that otherwise may have been missed.
Psychoanalysis is widely disputed, but perhaps it is necessary to return to the founder of
psychoanalysis himself. Freud (1949) wrote in his Outline of Psychoanalysis
the teachings of psychoanalysis are based on an incalculable number of observations and
experiences, and only someone who has repeated those observations on himself and on others is
in a position to arrive at a judgment of his own upon it. (p. 11)

18

Although I am hardly an expert on psychoanalysis, I believe that to dismiss the theory

completely would be a tremendous oversight because without it many other valuable
psychological techniques and theories most likely would have remained undiscovered

References
American Psychoanalytic Association (1998, January 31). About psychoanalysis [WWW
document]. URL http://www.apsa.org/pubinfo/about.htm
Colby, K. M. (1960). An introduction to psychoanalytic research. New York: Basic.
Edelson, M. (1986). The evidential value of the psychoanalyst's clinical data. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 9, 232-234.
Eysenck, H. J. (1986). Failure of treatment--failure of theory? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9,
236.
Farrell, B. A. (1981). The standing of psychoanalysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freud, S. (1949). An outline of psychoanalysis. New York: Norton.
Gay, P. (1989). Sigmund Freud: A brief life. In J. Strachy (Ed.), An outline of psychoanalysis (pp.
vii-xx). New York: Norton.
Greenberg, R. P. (1986). The case against Freud's cases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, 240241.
Grnbaum, A. (1986). Prcis of The foundations of psychoanalysis: A philosophical critique.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, 217-284.
Holt, R. R. (1986). Some reflections on testing psychoanalytic hypotheses. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 9, 242-244.
National Psychological Association for Psychoanalysis (1998, January 31). The making of a
psychoanalyst [WWW document]. URL http://www.npap.org/inst.htm

19

Popper, K. (1986). Predicting overt behavior versus predicting hidden states. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 9, 254-255.
Spence, D. P. (1986). Are free associations necessarily contaminated? Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 9, 259.

20