Darrell Hougen

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,159

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Comments posted by Darrell Hougen

    william.scherk

    Posted

    On 8/8/2018 at 6:20 PM, william.scherk said:

    My error, not Crews's.  I use the Chrome speech-to-text dictation extension [WSS: Added link Aug 9 ] SpeechnotesX Voice-typing. 

    Well, he is appealing to the general reader, who may understand 'consensual' as process of concerted scrutiny and the fruits thereof, scrutiny in the mode of scientific, legal,  historical reasoning, argument and 'state of the art.'  A  standard agreement with reality.  If you read it in context the alternative is Freudian hand-waving and slophouse epistemology.

    Thanks, both gentlemen, for your one-liners and scoffs.  This book may not be for you, and not because it has 700 plus pages.  If you read a chapter, I imagine you would be thrilled to have a strong argument against the evasions and bullshit of Freud apologists.

     

    Hi William,

    I don't mean to be dismissive. I figured the first was a typo, but the second I couldn't let go. Of course, the alternative to Crews is not Freud. That's a false dichotomy. I've never been a big fan of Freud or of psychology in general. I can't claim to know enough about Freud's views to really critique them, but the little I've read or heard sounds like nonsense. Piaget and other early childhood developmental psychology are probably better.

    Adult psychology has the misfortune of being contaminated by politics. One's opinions about the proper rolls of men and women in relationships and society are often colored by one's political views. If those opinions are used as the standard by which one judges whether a person has a psychological problem or not, then the standard of normalcy is also contaminated by politics.

    Having said that, I think the idea that standards of truth should be "consensual" or determined by consensus is misguided. In one of your other quotes above, Crews uses the term "objective" which is the usual standard of scientific truth. Rand imported the term "objective" into the realm of morality, but objectivity is certainly not unique to Objectivism.

    And no, I don't plan to read Crews's book on Freud. I'm not that interested in Freud, among other things.

    Darrell

     

     

     

    • Upvote 1