117JOURNAL OF CREATION 24(2) 2010

Freud and Darwinism

Jerry Bergman

Excerpts Below:

Conclusions

Both Marxism and psychoanalysis (Freund) were based on
Darwinism, and both are now widely regarded as moribund

[mor·i·bund, adjective: 1. (of a person) at the point of death. 2. (of a thing) in terminal decline; lacking vitality or vigor.]

or worse. Thirty years ago psychiatry professor Joseph
Wolpe concluded from a review of the research that current
psychotherapeutic practices often harm the patients they are
supposed to help. 50

Since then new techniques have largely
replaced Freudian approaches, including drug therapy.
The failure of Darwin’s progeny, including Marxism and
psychoanalysis, in the end is a result of the failure of
Darwinism itself as a system that accurately explains the real
world. Most of Freud’s innovative ideas, such as the Oedipus Complex,

[that incest is a normal natural human need or desire,
rather than a sinful temptation to be resisted and condemned]

have largely been empirically discredited. 51,52
Freud built his theory of the mind so completely on
Darwinism that his biographer, Ernest Jones, “bestowed on
Freud the title … Darwin of the mind.” 36 Of note is the fact
that Freud was actually a Lamarckian (i.e. he accepted the
inheritance of acquired characteristics theory of Lamarck),
as was Darwin, and remained so
“… from the beginning to the end of his life
what one must call an obstinate adherent of this
discredited Lamarckism. Over and over again he
implied or explicitly stated his firm belief in it.” 53
This may help explain why so many of Freud’s
theories are now recognized as wrong, and actually
irresponsible.

Freud was driven less by science than his “liberal-
individualist philosophy, itself a heritage of the Darwinian
age.” 54 In the end, as Nobel Laureate Sir Peter Medawar
concluded,

“Freud’s theories will remain for ever one of
the saddest and strangest of all landmarks in the history of
the twentieth-century thought.” 37

 

[Jerry Bergman has nine academic degrees including
two Ph.Ds. His major areas of study for his graduate work
were in biology, chemistry, psychology, and evaluation and
research. He graduated from Wayne State University in
Detroit, Medical University of Ohio in Toledo, University of
Toledo and Bowling Green State University. A prolific writer,
Dr Bergman has taught biology, chemistry and biochemistry
at Northwest State in Archbold, Ohio for over 24 years.
He is now an adjunct associate professor at The University
of Toledo Medical College.]

More Excerpts:

… One psychiatrist who exposed the fallacies of this
approach to helping clients was Karl Menninger, founder of
the Menninger Clinic. In his 1974 book, Whatever Became
of Sin, 41 Menninger recognized that the idea of being
ruled by our biology, and that misbehavior was a result of
inappropriately met needs that became part of the human
condition as a result of evolution, was erroneous. Menninger
concluded that the biblical teaching of personal responsibility
for accepting the reality of sin and then endeavoring to deal
with it is central to good mental health.

Criticism of orthodox psychoanalysis
Freud also faced “a flood of criticism” during his life,
which Jones notes Freud responded as his hero, Darwin,
did, namely by publishing “more evidence in support of his
theories”.42 According to Jones, Freud often tried to dismiss
criticism of his theories by concluding that his critics were
stupid, arrogant, illogical, and conscienceless.43 …

Orthodox psychoanalysis now widely discredited

Psychoanalysis has now been widely discredited by
both professional psychologists and others partly because
the ideas it is based on have been discredited. An example
is the ‘law of ontogenesis’, the idea that we repeat our
evolutionary history in the womb,

traveling through the
worm, fish, reptile, and mammal stages as we develop
from an embryo to a fetus. 25
[Pure Hogwash!]

The vast literature critical of
psychoanalysis published by mainline presses includes that
by Harvard graduate Harry K. Wells.46 Wells documents
that psychoanalysis was introduced in America only during
the last century and has, in this short time, passed from
orthodoxy, to revision, to reform, to reconstruction and,
last, to demise. A major problem with psychoanalysis has
always been its lack of solid scientific support and the fact
that its supporters have failed to give scientific proof for
the efficacy of their technique.47 Kenyon concluded that
“psychoanalysis is a constellation of suppositions without
a trace of scientific evidence in their support”.48
Orthodox Freudian therapy is now widely considered
moribund or, at the least, far more time consuming and
expensive than other equally or more effective therapies,
and of historical interest only. Few books today are
written critiquing orthodox psychoanalysis, except from
an historical viewpoint because of this fact. Now critiques
have spread to all of psychology. New York University
psychology professor Paul Vitz documents that psychology
has become a substitute religion, one that stresses what he
calls ‘self worship’.