I said that Freud is a 'fried fraud'.  Sometimes a fraud isn't a fraud.

Subjectivity isn't something that should be used in any form of scientific endeavor.  It's good for personal observations that may assist in developing hypotheses, but after that objectivity is the only way to do science - especially practice it.  Freud can receive credit at least for moving psychology/psychiatry/psychoanalysis away from previous forms of mental health diagnosis and treatments (labotomies, electric shock therapy, straight jackets, and so on).  And don't think that such unorthodoxy doesn't exist today.  Just do a search of Gary Schwartz (Ph.D. at the Univ. of Arizona).

Yes, there is much more to humans than surface behavior - it is not a good indicator of what's happening in the brain.  Thus, simply doing subjective analysis will not provide certainty with respect to the true underlying causes.  What would Sigmund have made of the 'Guy in an ape suit' video or left-right brain disconnection (for epilsy control), and other interesting developments in brain function that have shattered notions of brain-mind separation or that a person is a perfect recorder of witnessed events.  Studying the behavioral world-view changes of children as they mature is intriguing - young children don't see the world in the same way as older children/adults.  What mentalist Derren Brown does freaks me out! ;P

I don't think we will ever go back to pre-Modern era, but please let us not return to 'Post-Modernism', please!  In Max Planck's day, it was all done.  In an exclamation similar to Bill Gate's "Noone will ever need more than 64KB of memory", some Physicists were proclaiming that all physical phenomena had been explained by the then current theories of Physics.  Nothing left to see here, you can go now.  Then the nagging black-body radiation problem arose (among others) which couldn't be squeezed into the current mathematical models.  Planck just worked the other way round and found the mathematical model that fit the data - thus creating Quantum Physics.  This is what we now call "Theoretical Physics" - the land of String 'Theory' and Hawking for instance - build mathematical models on experimental data and see if the model has predictive power in the real world.
We may find a better paradigm than the scientific method, but it won't be a return to subjectivity one hopes.  One good thing about science is that no theory is set in stone.  Scientific progression isn't about status quo.

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

 -- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone