• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Reliability of Sigmund Freud's claims

Extracts from this document...


TOK - Sigmund Freud and Psychology Peter Frederiksen Svane 3/10 - 2008 ___________________________________________________________ 1. What did you learn that you considered as useful knowledge/information from watching the movie? In the TOK course, one is concerned with the extent to which something can be justified, and if the given knowledge is useful. The movie explained Freud's basic ideas about the forces governing human behavior. Whether these can be believed, or not, is in the end up to the individual to determine, and I will do so later. Freud's ideas give a way to explain different people's behavior, and hence a tool to predict how the individual person will most likely act in certain situations. That information, if applied correctly, can be very useful. If I am aware of that, according to Freud, some are more prone to commit various crimes that can directly bring me in danger, because they have grown up under certain conditions, I and society can take our precautions. Similarly, a person who has grown up under "optimal" conditions can benefit society, and one might therefore want to draw upon that person. The danger, however, of such knowledge resembles very much that of stereotypes. Those are by its very definition false, and therefore impose unjustified barriers between two person, cultures, etc. That, in fact, prevents society as whole from gaining knowledge through interaction. In the case with the supposed criminal, his background might not determine his future, and hence the precautions that his bystanders take, will be unfair, and prevent his development as a human being. ...read more.


Whether those messages are true or not is another case. Sometimes they do tell a valid thing, but other times they do not. Sometimes one can have a very strong intuition about something that in the end can be wrong. And the fact that intuition can be trained, educated and improved indicate that they are not fallible. Therefore one should be cautious about following one's intuitions blindly, since it does not guarantee the truth. Rather one should let it guide one, and have it double checked with other ways of knowing. 3. According to the film, why is Sigmund Freud given the title Father of Psychology? Does he deserve to be remembered as one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century? Why or why not? For a person like myself, who doesn't know a lot about psychology, the only ideas that I can mention from that field, I have realized, were developed by Freud. For me, that justifies his claimed position as the father of Psychology. A father is one who brings up his son or daughter, teaches them the important lessons of life, etc. Similarly, Freud lay out the groundwork for his field, and came up with the guidelines that his "child" should follow. It is not only his ideas that justifies such a position, but also the approach that he used to support his ideas. Using a more "scientific" method to establish his ideas, and appealing to intuition, he gave way to clinical psychology. The applications of psychology toady, it appears, are widespread, and in much use, for example, to analyze criminal minds, thus preventing them from committing new crimes. ...read more.


5. Why are human sciences considered "soft" subjects while natural sciences are considered "hard" subjects? The use of the words "hard" and "soft" in regard to the various sciences implies that a hierarchy exists. Whether this is justified or not is another case. The parameters that are used to place the sciences in the hierarchy, with the soft being below the hard, have their roots in how reliable and useful the knowledge is. Reliability, as was discussed earlier, depends on how well each of the steps in the scientific method can be carried out and to a satisfactory extent. The difference between the two are marked by differences in objectivity contra subjectivity. While the hard sciences typically entertains itself with the nature of external things, such as motion, structures, reactions, etc. that are somewhat perceivable, and therefore disassociated from intuition, soft sciences' focus are directed inwards at things that cannot at this point be perceived inherently. It is possible to observe "hard" objects, such as chemical reactions, but not "soft" objects, such as "the invisible hand" in economics. Some might say that it is not possible to observe such things as atoms within the "hard" spectrum, but while deductive reasoning and indirect measurements provide support for that theory, soft sciences find it harder to use deductive reasoning and often lack tools to measure a certain "force." The difference between the hard and soft sciences can be summed up using key words, such as reliability, ability to be perceived or measured, to what extent the scientific method can be applied, etc. One day, perhaps it will might be possible to quantify thoughts using MRI or something similar. In that case, psychology might become a little bit harder. ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge essays

  1. In what way does the problem of evil lead to atheism?

    to, until you are destroyed and come to sudden ruin because of the evil you have done in forsaking him".18 (Duet. 28:20) However, the Bible also offers passages that disagree with this view, people seem to suffer even though they have done nothing wrong and God's love is seen to

  2. we will always learn more about human life and human personality from novels than ...

    Charis : True, but at the same time scientific psychology is so restrained by the strict research methods which makes it unable to explain knowledge of personality as broadly as novel, thus, making it harder for us to obtain the knowledge.

  1. When should we discard explanations that are intuitively appealing?

    Sometimes, but not always, emotions can skew our intuitions to a point at which things which should be evident are overlooked. Would then, in this case, it be better to reject this intuition? Some are likely to say yes because of the painful memories that would remain.

  2. TOK Paper. The dangers of stereotypes, comments on Chimamanda Adichie: The Danger of a ...

    While poverty does exist in India, it is not the only thing that is in existence. It is upsetting to see that although we are such an educated country, there are a fair amount of people who unfairly assume negative facts about India, and associate ideas that may be true

  1. Vemos las cosas tal y como son, o tal y como somos

    La tarea de las ciencias es la de dar explicaciones racionales acerca de los fen�menos naturales que nos rodean, pero hasta hace relativamente poco, esta rama estaba lejos de la exactitud y objetividad que deber�an regirla. Antes de la creaci�n de m�todos generales para establecer par�metros e instrucciones universales en

  2. All knowledge claims should be open to rational criticism. On what grounds and to ...

    This truth is assumed to be correct: for mathematics, however, this truth is compulsory in order for us to continue with the deductive process. Kurt G�del, a prominent mathematician, proposes that "it is impossible to prove the consistency of arithmetic, which is to say, [there is] no rigorous proof that

  1. Determinism. Minority Report is very similar to a book called, Chronicle of a ...

    you are in tune in your spiritual life you will lead into the path that was made.

  2. Free Will vs Determinism Questions

    They believe that if one's actions are not determined by one's beliefs, desires, and character, then how could one possibly be held morally responsible for those actions? 1. Which (inherent nature or environmental nurture) is most influential? Any other factors?

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work