Formerly the Thinking Catholic Strategic Center
Sigmund Freud is infamous as one of Western Culture’s so-called Unholy Trinity, consisting of Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud, and last but not least, Karl Marx. These three are the authors of fatally flawed theories that became major, in fact, arguably the most major of all erroneous theories to ever infect rational thought in the history of Western Civilization. All are widely held to be “scientific” and yet all have no scientific basis whatsoever. All are easily falsified when subjected to objective critical thinking; none have any scientific evidence to back them up, all have heavy scientific evidence weighing against them. And yet they all enjoy popular support in the “scientific” community. Showing that science today is more a matter of consensus than of proofs, experiment, empiricism, objectivity and honest critical evaluation. And, proving that, today, popularity rules the once scientific laboratory.
This definition of Freudianism just lays out the basic ideas of Sigmund Freud, the recognized father of the field of psychoanalysis. The historic importance and world impact of these ideas are huge. The basic philosophical difference that Freud introduced to psychology was the notion of what drives human nature; Freud's big idea emphasized the importance of unconscious forces in determining beliefs, decisions and actions in human beings.
Before Freudianism, psychology primarily concerned itself with cognition, rational thought and the conscious intellect, which were deemed to be the dominant factors in mental health. Freud turned this upside down, arguing that mental health was subject to "subconscious" desires, urges, instincts and various inhibitions. He postulated that mental illness was traceable to repressed memories of traumatic incidents, usually from childhood, and usually of a sexual nature, which resulted in neurotic behavior and various manifestations of mental illness.
Mentally ill people are required, by the very definition of Freudianism, to "discover" these repressed, hidden causes in order to cure their mental illness.
The main problem with this should be immediately obvious. One cannot materially measure or even observe the immaterial, or the ephemeral. It is not even possible today to define human consciousness with any precision at all; Freud blew right past that problem, to "define" unconsciousness, and he did it to rave reviews of virtually all of his peers.
Cognition, understanding, perception, intellect, education, experience, reaction, decision-making, etc., are things that can be tested and observed. The subconscious mind, repressed memories and dream analysis are what Freudianism contends with, and none of these may be tested or observed; they may only be imagined or concocted. Freud's psycho-analysis is an obvious fraud.
Sarcastic Acronym Hover-Link Footnotes: For the convenience of those readers using devices that lack a mouse, these footnotes are provided for all webpages, in case any webpage contains any hover-links. (If you don't have a mouse, you can't "hover" it over a link without clicking just to see the simple acronym interpretation. Click a footnote link to see the gory details.)SLIMC1 Secularist Liberal Intellectual Media Complex
The Brilliantly Conceived Organization of the USA; Vic Biorseth
Return to the BLOG page
Return to the HOME PAGE
Subscribe to our Free E-Zine News Letter
Respond to This Article Below The Last Comment
Date: Wed Feb 10 07:04:02 2010
I would like to point out that Darwinism, Marxism, and Freudianism are NOT supported by the major scientific community.
Evolution is, but Darwinism is not. Darwinism believed that Humanity was the final step in evolution, and while yes, this is a step closer to reality than Lemarckism, but still not quite true.
Marx's beliefs weren't science at all, I don't what you meant by that. On the definition of Marxism page you equated Marxism, Communism, Socialism, and Leftism, these are all different ideas that are simply based on each other and have similar, though not equal ideas and ideals. I would like to have a more in depth discussion on this, so I have given you my e-mail address.
And for the actual topic of this article, Freudianism. It has been, on the whole, rejected by the scientific community for at least the last twenty years.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that I would appreciate it if either you had a greater understanding of the subject matter, or if you could reply to this and give me the understanding that you already have.
Date: Wed Feb 10 18:38:02 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
If indeed Darwinism, Marxism and Freudianism are not supported by the major scientific community, then the major scientific community has a very funny way of showing it. All three theories are formally taught everywhere, and opposition to them is held up to open ridicule where not prohibited or censored outright.
All published theories related to Darwin’s original GESGOEAEOT2 “fundamentalist” theory pointed to the same result – origin of species – and all were false. Lemarck’s heritability of acquired characteristics still pointed to the same thing Darwin pointed to, which was, evolution of species. No heritability of any kind except strictly within species has ever been accomplished, observed or recorded in the fossil record, by anyone, ever. Yet the theory addresses the evolution of species, does it not? As does Gould’s PEWAG3 theory, which, like all other variants of Darwinism, has never been accomplished in the laboratory, observed by anyone, or recorded in the fossil record. Ever. This is not science; it is pure nonsense.
Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Nazism, Fascism, Leftism, Liberalism, Progressivism, all have the same root and all drive toward the same end, which is some variant of statism, central planning and total government control. That necessarily means the end of liberty. The greatest champions, including Marx, called the movement scientific, and so do most of the elitist academics, politicians, political activists and those economists who still champion it today; I simply take them at their word. They appear to be a majority everywhere. I don’t waste energy differentiating between the nuanced variants of the theory; the whole thing is nothing but trash, so all variations are equally fatally flawed. This includes “teentsie-weentsie Marxism” forms of Keynesian Interventionism such as that espoused by Galbraith.
If Freud has been rejected by the scientific community, again, the scientific community has a damned funny way of showing it. Freud was the father of the field of psycho-analysis, a booming multi-billion dollar industry, here and everywhere. You cannot throw a rock without hitting some millionaire celebrity who doesn’t hit the couch regularly, and who doesn’t recommend it to everyone, because, you see, it’s scientific. Freud, today, is still the most quoted name in psychiatry, and even in psychology. Where is all the scientific refutation?
As I tried to explain in the Contact Me page, I had to end all the individual email dialogues because there were just too many of them to keep up with, and most of them were near duplicates of other dialogues in process. So it’s either dialogue at the bottom of whatever subject page you want, or start your own subject in the Thinking Catholic Blog page, where this and other current dialogues get automatically bumped to the top of the list with each new submission.
Those should give you an idea of the understanding I have.
Monday, January 28, 2013
Converted Page to SBI! Release 3.0 BB 2.0.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Added link into Sociological Definition Pages right-column link set.
Date: Wed Sep 24 2014
From: Vic Biorseth
Changes pursuant to changing the website URL
and name from
Thinking Catholic Strategic Center to
Catholic American Thinker.
Pulled the trigger on the 301 MOVE IT option June 1, 2014. Working my way through all the webpages. .
Never be lukewarm.
Life itself demands passion.
He who is indifferent to God has already forfeited his soul.
He who is indifferent to politics has already forfeited his liberty.
In America, religion is not mere window dressing and citizenship is not a spectator sport.
Do not allow our common destiny as a whole people to just happen without your input.
Seek the Truth; find the Way; live the Life; please God, and live forever.
Catholic American Thinker
Free E-zine Subscription
You will receive immediate email newsletters with links to new articles as they are published here. Your email is perfectly secure here; we use it only to send you the
Catholic American Thinker
and absolutely nothing else.
Sociological Definition Pages
Definitions of all the "isms" with a lot of consensus of thinking behind them, which makes them popular opinions or ideas seeking political favor.
Definition of Marxism: Total control of means of production, including workers. The definition of Marxism describes the social, economic and governmental philosophy of Karl Marx, co-author of the Communist Manifesto.
Definition of Freudianism: The psychoanalytical thought and practice of Freud, Jung and Kinsey. This definition of Freudianism addresses Sigmund Freud's turn of psychological focus from cognition and intellect to the unconscious & subconscious mind.
The definition of Darwinism in a nutshell. In the definition of Darwinism we find the foundational priciples upon which the quest for the atheist holy grail: the purely material origin of life itself.
Definition of Islam: Ideology of Military Conquest Masquerading as a Religion. The Definition of Islam describes the “Convert, Submit or Die” War Strategy of Mohammed.
The term Marxist defined: Marxism today has overtaken many earlier terms. Re the term Marxist defined in contemporary usage. The term Liberal doesn’t mean what it used to mean either.
Definition of Conservatism: "That government is best that governs the least." A definition of conservatism must recognize that, politically speaking, the terms Liberal and Conservative have traded places.
Definition of Libertarian : A Pro-Constitutional Practical Atheist. The definition of Libertarian describes a religiously-cleansed conservatism defending core American political values while denying moral absolutes.
Definition of Capitalism: Economic Organization based on Private Property. Any true definition of Capitalism must state that it is purely an Economic system, not a Government system, and it works most efficiently and profitably under Representative Government.
Our argument supporting the Rule of Subsidiarity, practicality and common sense. The moral and organizational Rule of Subsidiarity is crucial to the rights of man and essential for freedom.
Definition of Communism: Marx's theoretical classless utopian society. The Marxian definition of Communism involves the theoretical, perfect, classless society with common ownership of all economic "means of production."
Definition of Fascism: System of Marxism resisting the Worker's Revolution. A true definition of Fascism must recognize its deep roots in Marxism.
Definition of Anarchy: Opposition to State Authority in favor of - well - Gangs. They said it couldn’t be done; but even the most cursory Definition of Anarchy shows it to be even more stupid than Communism.
Definition of Socialism: Intermediary phase between Marxism and Communism. Definition of Socialism: 1) The older ideology with "collective" ownership of power and means of production; 2) Marx's "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat" evolving toward Communist Utopia.
Definition of Democracy: Ideology stressing direct or electoral majority rule. The definition of Democracy as a form of government involves policy and law determined by the actual, real majority of the people governed.
Definition of Republic: A state in which sovereignty rests with the people. This definition of Republic stresses autonomy and rule-of-law, and places the root of sovereignty in the people or their electorate.
Liberal Democracy defines elected representative government under rule-of-law. Liberal Democracy is differentiated from Social Democracy by not restricting the right to private property, which is to say, the means of production.
A pure Democracy that left the natural economy alone would be ideal. Pure Democracy in the Jeffersonian model, with unfettered free market Capitalism, would out-perform any other system.
Description of pure Socialism - the ideal that all Socialism is driving toward. A true, pure Socialism would be something considerably less than the Utopians dream of, since perfection is not of this world, or of this life, and will never be encountered in either.
Social Democracy defines an attempt to force-fit Marxist ideas into a Democracy. Social Democracy, neither fish nor foul, seeks, by devious means, by the gradual rather than revolutionary path, the ultimate victory of Communism, or, Communist Utopia.
Legally Destroying America, through Defining Treason Down. American Political Parties are swiftly dismantling Constitutional government, having first defined treason down to the point of non-existence.
Our definition of anti American goes considerably deeper than the dictionary. Anyone, anywhere, may oppose nationalism or national pride. Definition of anti American: one who ignores or opposes the American Constitution.
Our definition of pro American goes considerably deeper than the dictionary. Anyone, anywhere, may be a patriot. Definition of pro American: one who loves and adheres to the American Constitution.
"We belong to the Church militant; and She is militant because on earth the powers of darkness are ever restless to encompass Her destruction. Not only in the far-off centuries of the early Church, but down through the ages and in this our day, the enemies of God and Christian civilization make bold to attack the Creator’s supreme dominion and sacrosanct human rights.”--Pope Pius XII
"It is not lawful to take the things of others to give to the poor. It is a sin worthy of punishment, not an act deserving a reward, to give away what belongs to others."--St. Francis of Assisi
Truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.—Winston Churchill
The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.—Ayn Rand
If you can't find the page you're looking for, try the