[ClearCase_guy]

I consider the twentieth century to a bit of a dark age as far as the soft sciences are concerned, as they were pretty much all taken over by versions of Marxism. Sociology, Anthropology, History, Psychology, etc. I think that a scientific approach is possible in these areas -- but it's hard to find many people in the twentieth century who actually tried that. It's all about ideology -- conclusions first, baby! Then we'll go looking for supporting evidence.

At some point, Marxism will be rejected by academics, real research will be done, and enormous advances will be accomplished in just a few years. There is a Renaissance around the corner, though I may not live to see it.

[SeekAndFind]

Darwin’s theories certainly influenced Freud.

Until the 1920s or possibly even 1930s, Darwin’s and Freud’s theories were subject to roughly the same degree of “approval” (note the quotes).

In both cases, questions were asked whether their rather ‘big picture’ explanations could ever be tested properly ( scientifically), or whether they were even necessary for the conduct of empirical work in, respectively, biology and psychology.

However, by the 1940s, Darwin’s theory had come to be embraced by leading biologists (outside the USSR and possibly France) as providing a valid explanatory framework. Why Darwin managed to achieve that status, while Freud never did is the interesting comparative question to ask.

[bboop]

Freud wanted a world and theory without God, and he created theories to support it. Psychology is a false religion, with its own tenets, priests, inside knowledge, ‘cures.’