A problem that troubled Karl Popper (1969) was when a theory should be ranked as scientific. Popper wanted to distinguish between science and pseudo-science (a claim or belief presented as being scientific however does not adhere to the scientific method), he stated that science is different from pseudo-science because of its empirical method. A theory that Popper felt dissatisfied with was Freud’s theory of the personality, feeling uncertain about its scientific claims stating that although it is posing as a science it has more in common with primitive myths. A primitive myth refers to the collection of stories that have been passed from one generation to another; they often go back to ancient times (usually BC). In this essay I am going to discuss Popper’s view of Freud’s theory and why he concluded this.
Sigmund Freud (1923) is considered to be the father of psychiatry and amongst the accomplishments he has made the most prominent one is his theory of the personality. This has been the focus of many additions, different interpretations and modification and despite being criticised by many it still remains relevant today. Freud considered himself a scientist however others have criticised this. The ‘science’ of Darwin’s theory of evolution influenced Freud majorly and this caused him to set out to find hidden forces in the psyche (personality) that were purposive for survival of human species.
Freud believed that behaviour is a result of the interactions between the three parts of the mind: The ID, which is completely unconscious, immoral and primitive; the superego which is conscious and unconscious, representing the values and standards of a person; and the ego which is also conscious and unconscious, it helps us compromise and represents reality. According to Freud these 3 parts of the psyche are always in conflict and are manifested by certain anxieties. According to Freud, we experience psychosexual development stages unconsciously during our childhood which composes our adult personality. Successfully completing these stages is what causes you to become a heterosexual adult from being a vulnerable infant.
These stages occur from birth until puberty, and are as follows: the oral stage whereby the infant gains pleasure through feeding; the anal stage which occurs doing toilet training; the phallic stage where the infants libido is focused on the genitals, causing the infant to experience unconscious sexual desires for their opposite sex parent (experiencing the Oedipus Complex if a boy and the Electra Complex if a girl); the latency stage is a period of calm whereby sexual urges are repressed and the final stage is the genital stage in which the sexual urges are too strong to repress, resulting in sexual relationships. Fixation can occur at any of these stages, causing unfortunate consequences on the personality. For example, if parents start toilet training too early or are too harsh, this can lead to the child developing an anal-retentive personality. This will cause an adult to become obsessively tidy and punctual.
Karl Popper was an influential philosopher of science in the 20th century, who made a clear distinction between subjective and objective knowledge. Subjective knowledge concerns our beliefs and is based upon the testimony of our senses. Subjective knowledge also led to the common sense theory of knowledge expounded by Locke, Berkeley and Hume (1713); which Popper referred to as the bucket theory of the mind. He stated that the mind is an empty bucket whereby knowledge is poured. Popper opposed the common sense theory of knowledge, stating that information we receive from our senses is not as simple and immediate as how it is subjectively felt and there is more to it. Furthermore, he stated that the bucket is not empty as we have innate structures and ideas, which affect our knowledge. Popper argued that subjective knowledge is not the only kind and we cannot understand the growth of knowledge fully unless we take objective knowledge into account. For Popper, science is the embodiment of objective knowledge and it becomes possible because a thesis can be presented and critically assessed; becoming an object that can be rejected by others. However, subjective beliefs cannot be rejected because they are opinion-based. Due to this belief that theories should have the ability to be rejected (falsified); Popper claimed to have solved the problem of induction.
Popper (1986) noticed that there are two types of statements by scientists. The first are observations, for example ‘that swan is white’ and the second are universal statements categorising all instances, for example ‘all swans are white’. Popper was concerned with how a scientist moves from an observation to a universal statement, and this is the problem of induction. Based on this difficulty existing in moving from an observation to a universal statement; Popper concluded that science cannot be grounded upon such an invalid inference. Therefore, falsification is the solution to the problem of induction. He noticed that a singular statement such as ‘that swan is white’ cannot be used to form a universal statement, it can only be used to show that the statement is false. For example, if someone observed a black swan after saying ‘all swans are white’ this confirms that it was false so the statement is testable by being falsifiable. Popper viewed science as evolving through the successive rejection of theories that have been falsified, therefore causing better theories to be produced.
Popper (1963) had a preference of falsifiability over verifiability referring to the hypothetico-deductive method which is often regarded as the ‘true’ scientific research method, involving traditional stages of observing the subject to generate a testable and realistic hypothesis. This hypothesis has to be falsifiable and from this, the researcher makes an initial prediction which can be proved or disproved using the experimental process. The predictions made must be testable in order for the hypothetico-deductive method to be successful. Popper believed Freud’s theory of the psychoanalytic personality could not be falsified because it could not be tested due to it relying heavily on the unconscious mind. Thus, he made the claim that falsifiability is the point of distinction between science and pseudoscience. We can assume what is occurring in the unconscious mind but we cannot prove it. If we are not aware of the forces which guide us (our unconscious), then we cannot intervene or change them (Slife & Williams, 1996). Therefore, Freud’s theory was subjective rather than objective; he produced his theory without the traditional empirical method and this is why Popper believed it was a myth.
Popper (1969) believed that for a theory to be scientific it has to be confirmed; however, every case possible could be interpreted and confirmed by Freud. For example, adult behaviours could be interpreted by Freud by relating them to the psychosexual stages; if an adult smokes Freud would assume that they are orally fixated. If every human behaviour can be interpreted by this theory it is not falsifiable in any case and therefore not scientific. Also, his theory of psychosexual development was proposed without the study of children, all he used was his patients’ recollections, free associations and dreams which are unreliable. Patients may not remember and may lie displaying the social desirability effect whereby they give the information that they think the researcher wants to hear (Tourangeau, Rips & Rasinski, 2000; Tourangeau, Roger & Ting Yan, 2007; Groves, Fowler, Couper, Lepowski, Singer & Tourangeau, 2009; Holgraves 2004). Also, his theory was developed from a small sample; therefore, the results cannot be generalised. Within scientific research the results stern from a large population, whereby the participants have been selected purposely as they provide a sample that represents the whole population for generalisability (Cronbach, 1963). Because of the subjectivity shown in Freud’s work; which is not representative of science being objective, Auden (1940) described Freud as ‘not a person but a whole climate of opinion.’
In addition, Freud did not only interpret every possible case using his theory, he also invented many neologisms. However, he rarely defined them making them hugely open to interpretation; the vaguer the terms were the more they could be applied to peoples’ cases. This is opposing Popper’s philosophy of science, whereby all terms within science are defined and theories using the terms can be falsified; this is because these terms can be understood by anyone given a definition.
Furthermore, Freud (1881) used Darwin’s theory of evolution as inspiration when developing his theories. Popper’s (1978) view on whether or not Darwin’s theory of evolution is scientific has changed over time. He initially referred to the Darwinian theory as a ‘brilliant scientific hypothesis’ and then later stated that testable predictions cannot be derived from this theory. He made a distinction between the Darwinian theory of evolution and the Newtonian theory; stating that the Newtonian theory formulated a set of universal laws whereas the Darwinian theory proposed no such laws. Therefore, Popper considered the Darwinian theory to be invaluable meaning that Freud’s idea of using the ‘science’ of the Darwinian theory for inspiration into his own theories makes his theories even less scientific.
Carl Jung (1916) and Alfred Adler (1912) disagreed with Freud’s idea of the sexual instinct which he believed drives the psychosexual stages, which in turn develops our adult personality. Adler believed that human psychology is driven by goals and fuelled by a creative force. Jung also disregarded Freud’s idea of the sexual instinct, he believed that the libido is not only sexual energy but a psychic energy to motivate an individual in spiritual, intellectual and creative ways. Freud relating sexual instincts to his theories has been a very controversial issue; sex and sexual topics were not socially acceptable during the time period Freud lived in. Also, there is no proof of a sexual instinct and there is no way of proving it scientifically.
On the other hand, Poppers contributions of falsifiability have been criticised; Thomas Kuhn (1963) proposed that Popper focused too much attention to the ideal structure of scientific discovery, ignoring the historical reality of scientific discovery. He pointed out that scientists rarely reject a theory due to a single false event, therefore falsification is not a true activity of a scientist. Kuhn also makes a different distinction between science and pseudoscience; Popper stated that the difference is due to pseudoscience’s avoiding falsifiability, however Kuhn argued that that the distinction is due to pseudoscience’s lacking fundamental theories, agreed upon standards and puzzle solving; which are all characteristics of science. Imre Lakatos (1978) also criticised Poppers distinction between science and pseudoscience, believing that the real distinction is due to science being capable of producing dramatic and unexpected predictions, and how it is progressive. However, Paul Thagard (1978) suggested a lack of progress does not make something pseudoscientific.
Despite criticisms, Popper (1969) was led to make the conclusion that Freud’s theory of personality had “more in common with primitive myths than with science” because Popper’s ideas and theories do not support Freud’s work. Poppers main contribution to the scientific method was establishing that science was not infallible and that scientific disciplines often went down the wrong path, thus creating incorrect theories. Pseudoscience (which psychology and other social sciences were at the beginning of the 20th century) often created an accepted theory, although they did not follow the scientific method. This led him to question the definition of science, causing him to develop a scientific method addressing limitations. However, this definition did not address new disciplines (for example, Einstein’s theories were regarded as scientific however psychologists’ theories were regarded as pseudoscientific, due to Freud’s subjective theory). Until Pavlov (1902) and Skinner (1974), psychological theories were difficult to falsify because they didn’t use quantitative methods. Due to this, the discipline was regarded as pseudoscientific; even now Popperians doubt the falsifiability and usefulness of psychology and social sciences.
However, Popper has contributed hugely to modern psychology; causing falsifiability to now be a criterion of science and therefore being used within scientific research in psychology. As has Freud’s theory of the personality, introducing a subjective aspect to psychology.
ere…