If you're interested in learning more about the vital hours you spend unconscious, we recommend "Why we sleep,” Matthew Walker's groundbreaking book that examines how we can harness the transformative power of sleep to change our lives for the better. Download a free audiobook version here: audible.com/ted-ed And thanks! Every free trial started through this link helps support our nonprofit mission.
Someone once told me that Freuds biggest contributions to the field of psychology was actually having others so determined to prove him wrong that it moved the field as a whole forward.
These kind of comments can only come from people who had absolutely swallowed the myths of psychoanalysis. Contemporary neuroscience has proven basic analytic ideas. Plus, psychoanalysis did not end with Freud. As a young science, many ideas were reformulated and many more discoveries were made. In addition, we have data showing that therapists with different therapeutic modality framework tend to choose psychoanalytic therapy for themselves! Explain that! Today we know that psychoanalysis is at least as effective as other types of therapies. For example CBT. What makes it special though is that it sets a chain of changes which continue even after when the therapy has ended. ;) Please, know your facts first.
Ted-ed, can you PLEASE do a segment on Wu Zeitian, the only female emperor of china? She is extremely controversial and many details of her reign were filled with rumors and stereotypes, just like in "History vs. Cleopatra" and she would do great in the "well behaved women seldom make history" playlist!
Freud is one of those people in history that probably at the end of the day, should be given the credit for getting the train of thought rolling in a different direction that continues to this day. Even if it's to prove how wrong or weird he was. History isn't about how wrong or right you are at the end of the day, but usually how big of a splash you make in it.
I agree. People tend to forget that many good deeds are forgotten and bad deeds remembered. For example, help 10 beggars and not many would remember. But KILL 10 beggars and you would surely put on some news and many remembers it. So for Freud to be remembered in history means he makes a HUGE splash
@@mohammadtausifrafi8277 That depends on which psychoanalyst we are talking about but for example a suicide bomber is (to the person doing the bombing) a martyr and they go to heaven. So it falls on the collective unconscious of the Heroic Sacrifice.
@@mohammadtausifrafi8277 No, no sane psychoanalyst or other sane human will think that terrorism/murder of innocents is normal. Psychology will help to explain why people may do something like that but it won't normalise it
I strongly believe that trauma in our childhood (if not treated) manifests into something that greatly influences how we act, think, and show interest in later in life.
@@anamelchior7194 He is proving that trauma causes aggression and all the murderers rapists out there are the product of their childhood trauma. Basically they are right. Well no wonder our childhood shapes us but simultaneously we have that power within us to make changes to our behaviours and ultimately to our lives so that it doesn’t harm anybody including ourselves. But nobody wants to use that power until they get a certification from a therapist. Therapies are only good when you yourself want to bring change. And no therapist can help you if you don’t want to come out of it.
@@vijayalaxmikulkarni3162 part of Freud’s research involved analyzing how relationships between parents and children affect the children when they become adults, so the judge might’ve been reacting reflexively to perhaps Freud who somewhat resembles his own father.
@@ultimatebishoujo29 resemble? How could that be possible if the judge is African-American? I guess there lies the metajoke that made me pause and comment
Andrea Pregnolato I wanna see more like Christopher Columbus where a historical figure had a reputation for being good or saintly actually may not be all that great. Mother Theresa comes to mind
Freud was probably wrong about a lot of stuff. Good thing was that he helped build psychology to make it an actual thing. Thanks to Freud, we have a lot of modern psych, even if he was wrong about most of it.
His biggest contribution was in how psychologists and psychiatrists related to their patients, an approach that had far better therapeutic results than what came before. Treating your clients like human beings was kind of a new concept in his days. In addition, I think the idea that people are motivated by unconscious desires is not as crazy as it sounds. Rather, motivated by unacknowledged desires and denied desires.
Omg yes yes yes! This guy had a lot of positives and negatives to his life and reing. The perfect middle between "Good" and "Bad". It would be nice to see nice to see an episode about him. An episode about King George III is needed as well, because of how often he is portrayed as "Crazeh Tyranical Monarch, who lost the 13 Colonies" (which comes from American POV on the American Revolution), which is kinda bad because not only did folks in England like him during his reing, he was patreon of arts and science, did a lot of useful stuff in England, often donated to the poor, and was the one who built the Windsor Castle, which is pretty impresive. The image of him that we have today is mostly due to POV from America, the way we are taught U. S. History in schools, and how the media in which he is portrayed never really shows us his life and achievements outside of the revolutionary war. So, yeah, there's that...
Something I think this series highlights is that “a persons actions both good and bad have merit, you can’t make a hero or a villain out of just a few major points in someone’s life.” Another point is when founding a field or practice you can’t expect it to be perfect and never change
exactly. in my psychology book it said that a lot of therapists don’t find merit in psychotherapy. when i was reading freud’s concepts i said: wait a minute, i experience these things?????? why is something that i experience not taken seriously??? turns out cognitive therapy for me never worked because i have CPTSD. psychotherapy (mixed with cognitive) has helped me more than strictly cognitive. freud’s vocabulary & concepts are real and deserves respect in the field.
When you consider Freud was treading new grounds at the time, making mistakes - even major ones- were inevitable. If it weren't for Freud we might not have modern psychology as we know it. Right or wrong before you can criticize an idea that idea has to exist in the first place.
Not necessarily, since the Psychoanalist did its own things after they expelled from psychology dicipline. From what I learn the statistician did more impact on today modern psychology, such as Raymond Cattell and Hans Eysenck, which made psychological manifestation such as personality to be measureable; also the gestalt psychologist and social learning theorist (methodical behaviorist), they're the one who actually made cognition more accessible, rather than the psychoanalist in general. Sometimes I think that Freud didn't deserved all his credit and place in history of psychology, it should be given to Nietzsche, and we can still have influental psychoanalist such as Jung and Adler since they're aware of Nietzsche writing. Freud also aware of it, in fact he must be read Nietzsche and takes half of his works, but then pretend didn't hear about him.
@@BazookaChipmunk I know, also in Interpretation of Dream, but I read journal article, if I recalled correctly from 1998, there's account of interviewer who asked whether Freud read or heard about Nietzsche or not before his publication, in that section Freud had to admit that he read Nietzsche but prefer to deny and not reading more of his works, otherwise he had nothing or less to discover.
Major mistakes? Writing about your wild pipe dreams and trying to pass it as science is not even a mistake, it's just messing around. We should forget Freud and focus in absolutely all the ones who came after him, because Freud don't deserve half the merit of them.
As a person who suffered a traumatic incident as a child, I completely agree with the statement. My choice of clothes, how much time I spend with people, what kind of people I interact with it is all highly dominated by that one incident. It has been more than 10 years to that incident, still it dominates my personality.
I was so disappointed with that show. I couldnt watch it past the 7th episode because its just so overloaded with drugs and illusions and just pure weirdness.
the reason freud is celebrated in psychology is not because of his bizarre ideas. but because at that time his ideas sparked reactions and those reactions resulted in birth of innovative therapy ideas which modulated into what we know and apply now as therapy. that is the reason why he is called the father of psychology.
well also: the unconscious, the discontent created by cultural norms, the idea of talking therapy, the death drive, and the decentralization of the 'ego' as the locus of the self.
If he even believed she in fact existed. While Freud was born into a Jewish family & sometimes observed traditions for the sake of cultural heritage, he also made it pretty clear that religiously, he was an Atheist. Moses could be seen as a historical as well as a religious figure, but science puts a hard check on Adam & Eve.
I got all my info above from the three biographies I've read on him, but here are some interesting articles on the subject, which I found whilst double-checking (as my memory is sometimes faulty): www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/magazine/09wwln-lede-t.html www.verywellmind.com/freud-religion-2795858
@@Ruby321123 Does it? I mean, whether or not a person (in this instance two persons) can be verified to be historically real depends on things like archaeological records, historic sources, the actual chap's remains and so on and so forth. Given the lack of historic data from a point backwards, can the sciences really tell us in a definitive manner whether these two persons existed or not? I think not.
@@kostpap3554 I think the skeletal remains of a variety of human & human-like species shewing a clear line of evolution from upright apes certainly puts a serious dent in the story, & sets the bar for evidence very high for Biblically literal creationists if they wish to stay in the game.
It is a good one. Since they can bring up what happend with him in office during WW1, his behaviour during the war (he was born rich and liked living in at least some of his known comfort) and the like. And maybe debunk that he didn't smoke and drink as much as we think! I hope they do make it!
You know, I am starting to like the defense guy more and more, even when they are defending someone I don't like. Why? They can admit that their clients are *not perfect*, but they can also back up their defense with all the good stuff, where as prosecution guys comes off as someone who won't even listen to anyone.
I think that's kind of the idea of this series: Take a very controversial figure and have the accusing guy be very close minded, while the defendant is more open minded and reasonable, this series is meant to show that every influential human is just that, a human, someone who's choices were both great and flawed.
The thing that most of the critics ignore is that psychoanalysis does not care if you are or not a believer of its speech. In fact, its idea is to create a path for the patient so he can express by himself his own version of his storyline, synthoms and disease. His external life of course is important, but the inner one is essential. Greetings from Argentina!
@@mouadlahjiri6325 Freud was the one who theorized about defense mechanisms, incuding projection, in which "unwanted feelings are displaced onto another person."
Isn't the explaination for how come sugar is so bad for why it taste so good Explained by what happened thousands of millions of years ago. Isn't our fear of snakes Even though babies do have nateral fear of snakes. Or female centerism explained by evolutionary psychology. Look at Discovery channel history channel Natgeo they all use evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary psychology is especially used when talking about genders. Also fear of The dark even. Though there's still reasons to day. Evolutionary psychology is unfalsifiable sense their gaps in our knowledge of the past. But waight. Thanks to climate change and habitat destruction. Animals are changing their behavior instincts in often in one or less generations. Evolutionary proving evolutionary psychology is 🐂💩
When I first heard of this series, I was intrigued by the idea of looking at historic characters from two opposing perspectives. I loved every episode and how they conveyed the facts so well. Thank you for continuing this history series.
I’m reminded of the TV series “Frasier”, where the title character was a strict Freudian, his brother was a staunch Jungian, and his ex-wife was a modernist who thought they were both wrong!
Freud is to psychology what Lovecraft was to horror writing - he inspired an incredible amount of genuinely brilliant work, and paved the way for some truly spectacular individuals, but his actual methods, opinions, ideas and motivations range between suspicious and unpleasant at the best of times
@@generalfletch7043 clarification: not MLK. The bad side was his actions leading to division and violence. German city states began prosecuting Catholics on his lead. Some of his followers became no better than the Catholics they were trying to separate from on the grounds of corruption.
Freud was a pioneer, and thus was entering the unknown, as scientist's always are. Original idea's come out rough and are then refined over time. For my money, no one to this day has understood the ramifications of childhood as accurately as he elucidated them, and of course there were error's. How else do we learn? A true genius.
I firmly believe that the reason Freud is so prominent in psychological history is because he said such nonsense that people scrambled to prove him wrong, thus triggering an unprecedented amount of research.
Also because he is one of the first (if not the first) to take Psychology and move away from its parent, Philosophy, and tried to make it into a scientific endeavor.
when i took an AP psychology class my book said that freud’s ideas are not practiced anymore by therapists. i’ve been doing cognitive therapy with several therapists over the years. it never worked. i started doing psychotherapy & it worked. my hunch that i had a form of PTSD was right. i have CPTSD. a lot of therapists that i saw believed it was only anxiety. i posed the question that i think it’s more than that and they said no it’s anxiety. my psychotherapist uses talk therapy and EMDR to help with my CPTSD. we talk about the ego, repressed memories, my defense mechanisms, etc. freud’s way of practicing was extreme. that shouldn’t discredit his foundation of these concepts he coined. his discovery has helped me so much that now i can function better. i’m more self aware & i’m making healthier choices. psychotherapy works & should be valued the same way cognitive therapy is.
After certain experiences I've had a absolutely believe freud's overall message. I used to be skeptical, but I truly think that those who doubt Freud's thesis only need to have one or two direct experiences of delving into thier unconscious mind and you will realize the importance of exactly the things he talked about in your own life. It's easy to dismiss the subconscious mind, but when you actually see it for what it is and it's importance you will be awe struck
My LOVE/HATE relationship with Freud and Darwin. I respect them both for opening the path to know more about us as human beings and for us to debunk their theories. Science is not about personal bias (I.E. Darwin saying non whites and ppl with disabilities are closer to animals than human). I understand that psychology is not a exact science. I just hope our species will continue to improve so we can get a better understanding of ourselves.
Random fact: In Japanese, the name “Japan” is Nihon or Nippon, which means “Land of the Rising Sun.” It was once believed that Japan was the first country to see the sun rise in the East in the morning.
I read that actually it was a other kingdom at west of Japan that call what is now japan of land of the rising sun in a letter to japan's imperator he likes the name and starting to use it officially
@@deco90014 That would probably be China, since China was influential in the development of Korea and Japan. Nippon or 日本 might've been more informal names though that became formal in Japan, since I recall the Chinese also called Japan something like "wa", something to do with dwarves. Maybe History of Japan mentioned it.
Sorry that fact may seem irrelevant. Rulers and emperors in Japan have, since a very long time, justified their godlike social position by making their families direct descendents of the sun godess, or kami, Amaterasu. She's the figure of the sun and purity. That is very likely why japan is called 日本 (日 day 本 origin, essence) because they believed Japan was a country lead by direct descendants of the sun godess.
Related fact: element 113 was named "nihonium" in honour to Japan, along with elements 115, 117 and 118 (which were named moscovium, tenessine and oganesson) in 2016. It's the first time 4 elements are named at the same time, and the only time an element was named in honour to a living person (Yuri Oganessian, a physicist who did extensive research in this field).
Let's be honest here, it's gonna be difficult to defend Robespierre. "Yes he did cause the French riegn of terror, but common he didn't kill that many people". Edit: I meant come on.
Not quite. Robespierre was against slavery. He was against going to war with Austria. He was against creating the committee of public safety. He was against dechristianization. He was against capital punishment. All in all, he was against the policies that created the conditions of the reign of terror. He did go crazy in his last year though and betrayed Danton and Desmoulins. So I’m not defending Robespierre but I do think his legacy is complicated. Finally, to quote Mark Twain: “There were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror-that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.”
I think I’m only speaking for myself here- but I’d love to see history vs Vlad the Impaler While you can say he was a bloodthirsty vicious ruler, on the other side of the coin you *could* argue his brutality is because he was arguably the first true master of psychological warfare; definitely worth exploring at least (NOTE: I am not picking sides; just proposing a potential idea)
Oh, so you arent talking about how Freud "treated" young female patients that where abused by their male relatives? And instead to speak about the real problems, he diagnosed the victims with daddy issues and that the girls wanted "it" and it was their fault? Yes, i know it was a different time but this is so messed up for me
Other people treated women bad back then too, and you are bound to make major mistakes when you find something new. I'm not saying his actions are justifiable, I'm just saying that you have to consider his circumstances
I mean to be fair, he probably did not play therapy out of the goodness of his heart, or to help people. Rather to prove his theories, and Yea daddy issues do play a role in domestic abuse. I mean I would not say it would be the Women’s fault, but Much like a lot of Freud’s conjecture’s it would be perceived more sane not coming from him
I don't remember any case of Freud blaming their patients for being abused. You're probably treating a complicated subject in a superficial way, it's well documented that someone abused can actually feel pleasure, but that doesn't make it less horrible and neither is a reason for blaming the victim. Unfortunately these nuances are too complicated for the public.
From a student getting my degree in philosophy and psychology, I seriously think the pro-Freud case is much stronger than this video makes it out to be
Please make a video on: What if we fill the entire earth with water till atmosphere: 1. Water pressure on bottom of ocean? 2. Can earth crust sustain such pressure? 3. Total depth of ocean from Mariana trench to atmosphere? 4. Pressure on water molecule at bottom? 5. Any life can sustain under such pressure? 6. If crust collapse, then how mantle and water behave after mixing? 7. Earth's rotation and revolution behaviour? 8. Will water at top get out from space slowly? 9. Moon's behaviour?
I love how this episode took a turn, and it wasn't just about, was this historical figure a good or bad person, but rather do their ideas have any merit and should they be praised for their advancements. Well done Ted-Ed. P.S PLEASE DO THESE MORE OFTEN. I BEGGING YOU THESE AREN'T PUT OUT OFTEN ENOUGH!!!
Wow, that's exactly how I felt when I was studying Freud's theories. They gave us a lot to be developed, but they themselves cannot be taken too serious.
There are still many people practicing psycho analysis and studies conducted over the years have shown that psycho analysis works. The problem with psycho analysis is that it is extremely expensive because it requires of years of multi weekly sessions.
I truly believe we all know who won. He was a genius by far his imagination, innovation, and Balls are out of the chart. Maybe we are changing and updating but if it wasn't for him many people would suffer forever. who knows what would become of Yung and thousands of doctors not knowing their passion for the everyday unknown.
Headcanon names for the characters. Maurice Leighton Michael Clarke McDonald Gordon Viceroy Adams Bayar Sukhbaatar (From EP1) René Adolfé Dicotre-Dubois. (From EP4) Yuri Leninovich Tchaikovsky (Fron EP3) Ian Craig Emmerick Nixon (From EP7) Patrick Smith (From EP8)
I find this to be a very poor simplification of Freud’s ideas. No question that he was a man of his time, who’s views on many subjects are now outdated, but this video really lacks in subtlety. Just my opinion of course
3:12 Objection! Certain behaviors have been shown to be hairtible in epigenetics studies on rats. More research should be conducted before just dismissing it all-together. The mechanism may have not been correct but the theory was not completely unfounded.
Objection! Hypotheses brought up without proof can be rejected without proof, if they seem less credible than the alternative. Given that this is fantastical, we can discount this unless Freud or his successors make a study about it.
Behavioural traits are partially genetic, experientially developed traits are not. So for example, a person whose father faced behavioural changes due to trauma will not develop those same traits.
@@ameyakirtane6050 yes, but if past generations kept facing the same exact trauma over and over it would eventually catch up to the present, not just physically but psychologically, as in when you see a cliff one would hesitate near it, even if they never had seen a height of great length before
@@Handlelesswithme There's a difference between behaviours generated through evolution and behaviours inherited from past trauma. We're not scared of heights because our ancestors faced the trauma of falling. We're scared because everyone who wasn't scared of heights died, and the only people left were those with the specific mutations which made them scared of heights, which they passed on to us. So it's not exactly the same as inheriting trauma.
I love these videos so much because they do such a great job representing both sides of the argument for and against a person. I’m honestly never sure what to think afterward.
Not a great episode IMO. A lot of vague generalities without specifics. "He viewed homosexuality as a developmental glitch." Meaning what? That he proposed it was a deep part of a person's identity and not an arbitrary choice? Isn't that progress? "His theories were non-falsifiable." Like what? I can actually think of an example of this, but it shocks me TED-ED couldn't provide any when they did the research to make this video.
"The Forgotten Language" by Freud's student Erich Fromm! An excellent example on how the greatest intuitive mind has approached one subject, sleep. The fact that his approach was prone to corrections doesn't make it wrong.
I read once about some mice that were being tested on for fear-related study. The mice's family that were given reasons to fear sounds (probably by inducing pain) and the offspring of those mice were scared by the sounds even when the mice's offspring were NOT given a reason to be afraid of the sounds. The control group of mice (who were not induced pain) were unaffected by the sounds. I wonder if the things described at 3:30 could be explained by those trials.
Interesting idea, and there is some stuff in Freud to suggest he was speaking biologically. However, I think for the most part he is talking about culturally passed-on psychological structures (think like generational trauma).
We just learned about him in Gen psych. There was so many things of his theories that was pretty crazy and made no sense. Some actually are right, but others are just plain wrong.
If you're interested in learning more about the vital hours you spend unconscious, we recommend "Why we sleep,” Matthew Walker's groundbreaking book that examines how we can harness the transformative power of sleep to change our lives for the better. Download a free audiobook version here: audible.com/ted-ed And thanks! Every free trial started through this link helps support our nonprofit mission.
These History Vs are Brilliant! Make more!
@@mraj8372 yea and I am home schooled and this helps me learn a little
Maybe make Pythagoras vs history next owo
Please make more they are masterpieces. I enjoy them alot. And are very educational.
To be honest i follow you because of them.
Please make Carl Jung!
Someone once told me that Freuds biggest contributions to the field of psychology was actually having others so determined to prove him wrong that it moved the field as a whole forward.
Noice, I can see that happening. 😂
Thats the only way some ppl achieve anything. In opposition to another. Devils advocate
These kind of comments can only come from people who had absolutely swallowed the myths of psychoanalysis. Contemporary neuroscience has proven basic analytic ideas. Plus, psychoanalysis did not end with Freud. As a young science, many ideas were reformulated and many more discoveries were made. In addition, we have data showing that therapists with different therapeutic modality framework tend to choose psychoanalytic therapy for themselves! Explain that! Today we know that psychoanalysis is at least as effective as other types of therapies. For example CBT. What makes it special though is that it sets a chain of changes which continue even after when the therapy has ended. ;) Please, know your facts first.
@@Jubidar psychoanalysis is only popular in a few countries
Whoever told you that sounded like a complete ignoramus. And somewhat bitter.
We need more of this series, this is not enough
TRUEE 🤘🏼
Awe
How about History V Simon Bolivar
I would love to see Nobunaga v History
History vs Fidel Castro!
A freudian slip is a phrase used to describe when someone says one thing but actually is talking about a mother thing.
Edit - I mean another thing.
oh
Freudian slip: when you say one thing and mean your mother
I love what you did there lmao
Get out...!
Isn’t it jungian?
Ted-ed, can you PLEASE do a segment on Wu Zeitian, the only female emperor of china? She is extremely controversial and many details of her reign were filled with rumors and stereotypes, just like in "History vs. Cleopatra" and she would do great in the "well behaved women seldom make history" playlist!
That would be great 😉👍
i rly like ur idea
That's awesome 👍👍
replying so TedEd might see
Great idea
Freud is one of those people in history that probably at the end of the day, should be given the credit for getting the train of thought rolling in a different direction that continues to this day. Even if it's to prove how wrong or weird he was.
History isn't about how wrong or right you are at the end of the day, but usually how big of a splash you make in it.
I agree. People tend to forget that many good deeds are forgotten and bad deeds remembered. For example, help 10 beggars and not many would remember. But KILL 10 beggars and you would surely put on some news and many remembers it. So for Freud to be remembered in history means he makes a HUGE splash
He built the station without an idea about engineering, but trains left the station
@@bluey3575xactly!!! I donate 1 kidney and people call me a hero but I donate 10 kidneys and suddenly I'm on death row!?
Well Said 😮😊
"How bold one gets when one is sure of being loved"
How goddamn true can ya get?
I'd sure like to know that feel
@@Cheyruz khz ydzguy zý
Can you please tell me what it means. I need the explanation please :)
@@vijayalaxmikulkarni3162 I think it means that when someone loves you become more confident and brave
a great philosopher, terrible therapist,
Freud: It's normal to want to kill your dad.
Freud's dad: Yo what the fu-
So is there any psychoanalyst rationalizing terrorists killing innocent people? That cannot be more atrocious despite being definitely atrocious.
@@mohammadtausifrafi8277 That depends on which psychoanalyst we are talking about but for example a suicide bomber is (to the person doing the bombing) a martyr and they go to heaven. So it falls on the collective unconscious of the Heroic Sacrifice.
@@artofthepossible7329 thank you very much for the reply. So at least to some psychoanalyst, even that is normal?
@@mohammadtausifrafi8277 No, no sane psychoanalyst or other sane human will think that terrorism/murder of innocents is normal. Psychology will help to explain why people may do something like that but it won't normalise it
@@mohammadtausifrafi8277 Better to think of it as an explanation as to why abnormal and extreme behaviour in humans can exist.
Everytime a girl calls her boyfriend "daddy" Freud's soul gains little power.
and so we get closer to the day when the daedric lord of parental issues shall walkthe earth once more. ALL HAIL SIGMUND FREUD
his soul's power must be universe level now
@@ceasefire2825 good God, why does his name sound so fitting as a Daedric Lord?! 😆
@@ceasefire2825 to think about it, he does sound like a daederic prince of Skyrim, his first name atleast
so when we call gf "mommy", balzac's soul gains little power too?
I strongly believe that trauma in our childhood (if not treated) manifests into something that greatly influences how we act, think, and show interest in later in life.
Serial killers needed Jung and frued.
True except not in the way Freud described it
@@bunnybird9342 shut up he was right
@@sid.469 why being so aggressive
@@anamelchior7194 He is proving that trauma causes aggression and all the murderers rapists out there are the product of their childhood trauma. Basically they are right. Well no wonder our childhood shapes us but simultaneously we have that power within us to make changes to our behaviours and ultimately to our lives so that it doesn’t harm anybody including ourselves. But nobody wants to use that power until they get a certification from a therapist. Therapies are only good when you yourself want to bring change. And no therapist can help you if you don’t want to come out of it.
00:43 "Dad?"
That part killed me lmao
lol I know what you mean
@@ultimatebishoujo29 can you please help me understand? please :)
@@vijayalaxmikulkarni3162 part of Freud’s research involved analyzing how relationships between parents and children affect the children when they become adults, so the judge might’ve been reacting reflexively to perhaps Freud who somewhat resembles his own father.
@@ultimatebishoujo29 resemble? How could that be possible if the judge is African-American? I guess there lies the metajoke that made me pause and comment
@@JRavelo the judge could've still had a dad that resembled in behaviour
We need a "History vs" revival.
+1
Andrea Pregnolato I wanna see more like Christopher Columbus where a historical figure had a reputation for being good or saintly actually may not be all that great. Mother Theresa comes to mind
400 hundred likes in 4 days
I think we all agree with you!
Please, can we get Ivan the terrible
Winston Churchill
Love the Freudian joke y'all made. Judge looks at Freud's picture and goes "Dad?"
Brilliant!
Can you explain it
@@navd8279 I don't think that's it. He's the father of modern psych, but there were peeps before him
@@ch.illmatic i think because he introduced the oedipus complex: daddy issues lol so people joked about it
@@hani1528 Or just the fact they look alike...
It can also be a Freudian slip but yeah Oedipus complex too
Freud was probably wrong about a lot of stuff. Good thing was that he helped build psychology to make it an actual thing. Thanks to Freud, we have a lot of modern psych, even if he was wrong about most of it.
He was definitely right about most of things... Not sure if you read his books
He is one of the greatest psychologist to be honest...
@@bushraduti6780 he was an important one....but i cant agree with 'right about most of the things'
Except he was RIGHT about most of it.
@@lucyk2634 , for example?
His biggest contribution was in how psychologists and psychiatrists related to their patients, an approach that had far better therapeutic results than what came before. Treating your clients like human beings was kind of a new concept in his days.
In addition, I think the idea that people are motivated by unconscious desires is not as crazy as it sounds. Rather, motivated by unacknowledged desires and denied desires.
I'd love to see a "History vs. King Louis XIV."
Yesssss. It is needed
Omg yes yes yes!
This guy had a lot of positives and negatives to his life and reing. The perfect middle between "Good" and "Bad". It would be nice to see nice to see an episode about him.
An episode about King George III is needed as well, because of how often he is portrayed as "Crazeh Tyranical Monarch, who lost the 13 Colonies" (which comes from American POV on the American Revolution), which is kinda bad because not only did folks in England like him during his reing, he was patreon of arts and science, did a lot of useful stuff in England, often donated to the poor, and was the one who built the Windsor Castle, which is pretty impresive. The image of him that we have today is mostly due to POV from America, the way we are taught U. S. History in schools, and how the media in which he is portrayed never really shows us his life and achievements outside of the revolutionary war. So, yeah, there's that...
I've been researching his life and stuff, and boi was that guy a complex, morally grey monarch... I think an episode about him would be wonderful.
@@annorakanon not gonna lie I think he got what was coming
What about Napoleon III?
Something I think this series highlights is that “a persons actions both good and bad have merit, you can’t make a hero or a villain out of just a few major points in someone’s life.”
Another point is when founding a field or practice you can’t expect it to be perfect and never change
Yes, we shouldn't judge him for what is out of his control, for example, his unconsciousness influence in his research.
Just like the pioneers who experimented to know the full human anatomy.
exactly. in my psychology book it said that a lot of therapists don’t find merit in psychotherapy. when i was reading freud’s concepts i said: wait a minute, i experience these things?????? why is something that i experience not taken seriously??? turns out cognitive therapy for me never worked because i have CPTSD. psychotherapy (mixed with cognitive) has helped me more than strictly cognitive. freud’s vocabulary & concepts are real and deserves respect in the field.
Yeah as a character I hate him, I wouldnt want to be his friend for sure. But if were talking about impact, he definitely had a lot of it.
I like the idea of presenting two different points of view in a court. It shows how complicated was Freud's studies.
When you consider Freud was treading new grounds at the time, making mistakes - even major ones- were inevitable. If it weren't for Freud we might not have modern psychology as we know it. Right or wrong before you can criticize an idea that idea has to exist in the first place.
Not necessarily, since the Psychoanalist did its own things after they expelled from psychology dicipline. From what I learn the statistician did more impact on today modern psychology, such as Raymond Cattell and Hans Eysenck, which made psychological manifestation such as personality to be measureable; also the gestalt psychologist and social learning theorist (methodical behaviorist), they're the one who actually made cognition more accessible, rather than the psychoanalist in general.
Sometimes I think that Freud didn't deserved all his credit and place in history of psychology, it should be given to Nietzsche, and we can still have influental psychoanalist such as Jung and Adler since they're aware of Nietzsche writing. Freud also aware of it, in fact he must be read Nietzsche and takes half of his works, but then pretend didn't hear about him.
@@moch.farisdzulfiqar6123 bruh he directly references Nietzsche in Beyond the Pleasure Principle.
@@BazookaChipmunk I know, also in Interpretation of Dream, but I read journal article, if I recalled correctly from 1998, there's account of interviewer who asked whether Freud read or heard about Nietzsche or not before his publication, in that section Freud had to admit that he read Nietzsche but prefer to deny and not reading more of his works, otherwise he had nothing or less to discover.
It's also important to understand that Freud disproved a lot of his own theories.
Major mistakes? Writing about your wild pipe dreams and trying to pass it as science is not even a mistake, it's just messing around.
We should forget Freud and focus in absolutely all the ones who came after him, because Freud don't deserve half the merit of them.
I can’t wait to see Mother Theresa’s trial
(And I’m a devout catholic)
You know what, try some of that Epic Rap Battle's Mother Theresa vs Sigmund Freud
@@defaulted9485 i just came from that rap battle and i saw this one
Patrick Preston what did she do?
Y E S
Why would you want mother Teresa trial. She did nothing wrong did she?
I like how they just didn't mention what he's most famous for yet everyone in the comments is talking about it
4:05 Do you mean this?
Why did Sigmund Freud cross the road?
To get to the mother side.
*angrily likes comment*
Oh damn 😂😂😂
or he herd a call of ice age
Freud level "yo mama" jokes haha
Oh no
As a person who suffered a traumatic incident as a child, I completely agree with the statement. My choice of clothes, how much time I spend with people, what kind of people I interact with it is all highly dominated by that one incident. It has been more than 10 years to that incident, still it dominates my personality.
Just get some bitches
most critics of freud don’t believe ptsd isn’t a thing tho
If you want to learn more about Freud do anything but watching the Netflix Show about him
He is a pioneer but not a good clinical researcher, i recognize.
I was so disappointed with that show. I couldnt watch it past the 7th episode because its just so overloaded with drugs and illusions and just pure weirdness.
You guys are talking about neon genesis evangelion right?.......right??
Wait, so Freud didn't solve murders?!
SgtJuJu I completely agree, I had the same feeling at the end of the 7th episode. but you should watch the 8th one, everything concludes nicely
the reason freud is celebrated in psychology is not because of his bizarre ideas. but because at that time his ideas sparked reactions and those reactions resulted in birth of innovative therapy ideas which modulated into what we know and apply now as therapy. that is the reason why he is called the father of psychology.
* What Freud got absolutely right: transference, human prolonged infantilism, defense mechanisms, and repression.
* What Freud got absolutely wrong: everything else.
well also: the unconscious, the discontent created by cultural norms, the idea of talking therapy, the death drive, and the decentralization of the 'ego' as the locus of the self.
no but that's the thing- he never got anything _absolutely_ right beCAUSE HE DIDN'T USE SCIENCE
He was right about more than that.
@@reuben8856 The unconscious was known well before Freud... educate me on what else he got right? *please
Freud was wrong about repressed dreams.
Freud was correct about the Super-Ego, Oedipus complex, Id
Freud is like that one kid that writes up stories in an exam and sometimes still manages to top the class.
I know right?
@@MoskusMoskiferus1611 no
That sounds like me lol. Something me and Freud can agree upon xD
😂😂😂
Freud was a giant clown except that is an insult to clowns
Based on his work then, Freud’s mummy issues must go all the way back to Eve.
Lol
If he even believed she in fact existed. While Freud was born into a Jewish family & sometimes observed traditions for the sake of cultural heritage, he also made it pretty clear that religiously, he was an Atheist. Moses could be seen as a historical as well as a religious figure, but science puts a hard check on Adam & Eve.
I got all my info above from the three biographies I've read on him, but here are some interesting articles on the subject, which I found whilst double-checking (as my memory is sometimes faulty):
www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/magazine/09wwln-lede-t.html
www.verywellmind.com/freud-religion-2795858
@@Ruby321123 Does it? I mean, whether or not a person (in this instance two persons) can be verified to be historically real depends on things like archaeological records, historic sources, the actual chap's remains and so on and so forth. Given the lack of historic data from a point backwards, can the sciences really tell us in a definitive manner whether these two persons existed or not? I think not.
@@kostpap3554 I think the skeletal remains of a variety of human & human-like species shewing a clear line of evolution from upright apes certainly puts a serious dent in the story, & sets the bar for evidence very high for Biblically literal creationists if they wish to stay in the game.
How about History vs. Winston Churchill?
That would be epic
He was an a*se, from an Indian point of view.
It is a good one. Since they can bring up what happend with him in office during WW1, his behaviour during the war (he was born rich and liked living in at least some of his known comfort) and the like. And maybe debunk that he didn't smoke and drink as much as we think! I hope they do make it!
@Jeremy Brookes No I'm talking about churchill because there was a famine in Bengal that killed 2 million people, and many blame Churchill for it.
@@sharvahalde6040 I would argue that from any point of view, tbh.
You know, I am starting to like the defense guy more and more, even when they are defending someone I don't like. Why? They can admit that their clients are *not perfect*, but they can also back up their defense with all the good stuff, where as prosecution guys comes off as someone who won't even listen to anyone.
Why do you think they won't listen to anyone who's defending Freud?
I think that's kind of the idea of this series: Take a very controversial figure and have the accusing guy be very close minded, while the defendant is more open minded and reasonable, this series is meant to show that every influential human is just that, a human, someone who's choices were both great and flawed.
The thing that most of the critics ignore is that psychoanalysis does not care if you are or not a believer of its speech. In fact, its idea is to create a path for the patient so he can express by himself his own version of his storyline, synthoms and disease. His external life of course is important, but the inner one is essential.
Greetings from Argentina!
"That would be projecting" I loooove this series
It took so long for they to made an episode thougt
lol I love it too
i literally just got that reference lol
@@tentacryl1201 can you explain
@@mouadlahjiri6325 Freud was the one who theorized about defense mechanisms, incuding projection, in which "unwanted feelings are displaced onto another person."
Why didn’t the bouncer let Sigmund Freud into the nightclub?
He forgot his Id
Maybe he thought he didn't need an Id because of his EGO.
Isn't the explaination for how come sugar is so bad for why it taste so good Explained by what happened thousands of millions of years ago.
Isn't our fear of snakes Even though babies do have nateral fear of snakes.
Or female centerism explained by evolutionary psychology. Look at Discovery channel history channel Natgeo they all use evolutionary psychology.
Evolutionary psychology is especially used when talking about genders.
Also fear of The dark even. Though there's still reasons to day. Evolutionary psychology is unfalsifiable sense their gaps in our knowledge of the past. But waight. Thanks to climate change and habitat destruction. Animals are changing their behavior instincts in often in one or less generations. Evolutionary proving evolutionary psychology is 🐂💩
@@osmosisjones4912 evolutionary psychology is a whistleblow for the alt right and Nazism
@@osmosisjones4912 one can't argue with logic onto something that isn't logic itself
Mariano Ntrougka It’s been a while since I’ve seen such an un uninformed comment.
When I first heard of this series, I was intrigued by the idea of looking at historic characters from two opposing perspectives. I loved every episode and how they conveyed the facts so well. Thank you for continuing this history series.
I’m reminded of the TV series “Frasier”, where the title character was a strict Freudian, his brother was a staunch Jungian, and his ex-wife was a modernist who thought they were both wrong!
Freud is one of the easiest people to defend on this show. He didn’t kill anybody or do anything atrocious, just had silly ideas.
Me: lets close youtube . There's nothing intresting.
Ted Ed : i am speed
1919helio1919 hes saying he was about to close youtube when ted posted
@@EpicFuckingCoolGuy69420 yup!
@@bruh-kj1yo ted is speed
@@bruh-kj1yo ted Ed uploaded fast before he can close the app
@@dervvy thanks everybody for defending me .😜
People binge watching Netflix
me binge watching ted ed
there's a netflix show entitled freud
Thanks for suggestion i would like to watch that 😅
Freud is to psychology what Lovecraft was to horror writing - he inspired an incredible amount of genuinely brilliant work, and paved the way for some truly spectacular individuals, but his actual methods, opinions, ideas and motivations range between suspicious and unpleasant at the best of times
Lovecraft in fairness lived at a time where we had literal Jim Crow laws on the books.
I loved that the animator changed his voice to make new voices for the characters.
Ideas for future episodes
Julius Caesar
Alexander the Great
Winston Churchill
Martin Luther
Charlemagne
Emperor Meiji
Marcus Aurelius
What’s the bad side to Martin Luther?
@@generalfletch7043 top of my head, anti-Semitism
@@generalfletch7043 Which Martin Luther?
@@generalfletch7043 clarification: not MLK. The bad side was his actions leading to division and violence. German city states began prosecuting Catholics on his lead. Some of his followers became no better than the Catholics they were trying to separate from on the grounds of corruption.
These History Vs are Brilliant! Make more!
No matter how many episodes you make...never change the judge .
I tend to appreciate Freud more for his analysis of sociology, philosophy and history then his actual clinical psychology.
Freud was a pioneer, and thus was entering the unknown, as scientist's always are. Original idea's come out rough and are then refined over time. For my money, no one to this day has understood the ramifications of childhood as accurately as he elucidated them, and of course there were error's. How else do we learn? A true genius.
I see Freud as an "modern" Greek philosopher/scientists (like Platon, Archimedes etc.).
a warped, bigoted, unethical genius, but sure, yes.
As a psychology student, I love when Ted-Ed make these videos
@Seven Inches of Throbbing Pink Jesus hu-huhh??
We sure do
I firmly believe that the reason Freud is so prominent in psychological history is because he said such nonsense that people scrambled to prove him wrong, thus triggering an unprecedented amount of research.
Also because he is one of the first (if not the first) to take Psychology and move away from its parent, Philosophy, and tried to make it into a scientific endeavor.
so he was basically like the guy who burned the library of Alexandria just for his name to be remembered in history?
Evidence based studies about psychotherapy say the opposite. First study then talk.
Yes
Aanchal Saxena but do you look at that behavior with bad eyes?( trying to prove him wrong)
missed this series
when i took an AP psychology class my book said that freud’s ideas are not practiced anymore by therapists. i’ve been doing cognitive therapy with several therapists over the years. it never worked. i started doing psychotherapy & it worked. my hunch that i had a form of PTSD was right. i have CPTSD. a lot of therapists that i saw believed it was only anxiety. i posed the question that i think it’s more than that and they said no it’s anxiety. my psychotherapist uses talk therapy and EMDR to help with my CPTSD. we talk about the ego, repressed memories, my defense mechanisms, etc. freud’s way of practicing was extreme. that shouldn’t discredit his foundation of these concepts he coined. his discovery has helped me so much that now i can function better. i’m more self aware & i’m making healthier choices. psychotherapy works & should be valued the same way cognitive therapy is.
Any techniques you’ll like to share?
@@notyouraveragejoe7003 EMDR was developed in the late 20th century and it's a method used in psychotherapy
After certain experiences I've had a absolutely believe freud's overall message. I used to be skeptical, but I truly think that those who doubt Freud's thesis only need to have one or two direct experiences of delving into thier unconscious mind and you will realize the importance of exactly the things he talked about in your own life. It's easy to dismiss the subconscious mind, but when you actually see it for what it is and it's importance you will be awe struck
I agree well said
fun fact: freud has never used the metaphor of an iceberg
The last time I was this early, psychoanalysis hadn't been founded yet.
History vs Walter Elias Disney?
Seriously, for a guy who produced cartoons, he was sure a pulverising figure who left an equally divisive legacy...
very true!
That might be interesting
He was a very dark character
Sure he was
Also controversies about him being anti semit
2:57
Harry Potter theorists: WRITE THAT DOWN WRITE THAT DOWN.
Lol I can see it
My LOVE/HATE relationship with Freud and Darwin. I respect them both for opening the path to know more about us as human beings and for us to debunk their theories. Science is not about personal bias (I.E. Darwin saying non whites and ppl with disabilities are closer to animals than human). I understand that psychology is not a exact science. I just hope our species will continue to improve so we can get a better understanding of ourselves.
Random fact: In Japanese, the name “Japan” is Nihon or Nippon, which means “Land of the Rising Sun.” It was once believed that Japan was the first country to see the sun rise in the East in the morning.
How did you get this information,I'm just asking for more facts
I read that actually it was a other kingdom at west of Japan that call what is now japan of land of the rising sun in a letter to japan's imperator he likes the name and starting to use it officially
@@deco90014 That would probably be China, since China was influential in the development of Korea and Japan. Nippon or 日本 might've been more informal names though that became formal in Japan, since I recall the Chinese also called Japan something like "wa", something to do with dwarves.
Maybe History of Japan mentioned it.
Sorry that fact may seem irrelevant. Rulers and emperors in Japan have, since a very long time, justified their godlike social position by making their families direct descendents of the sun godess, or kami, Amaterasu. She's the figure of the sun and purity. That is very likely why japan is called 日本 (日 day 本 origin, essence) because they believed Japan was a country lead by direct descendants of the sun godess.
Related fact: element 113 was named "nihonium" in honour to Japan, along with elements 115, 117 and 118 (which were named moscovium, tenessine and oganesson) in 2016. It's the first time 4 elements are named at the same time, and the only time an element was named in honour to a living person (Yuri Oganessian, a physicist who did extensive research in this field).
Finally! Another History versus series. We don't get enough of these!
History vs. Cromwell. History vs. Robespierre. History vs. Tito. History vs. Bismarck. History vs. Teddy Roosevelt.
Let's be honest here, it's gonna be difficult to defend Robespierre.
"Yes he did cause the French riegn of terror, but common he didn't kill that many people".
Edit: I meant come on.
Not quite. Robespierre was against slavery. He was against going to war with Austria. He was against creating the committee of public safety. He was against dechristianization. He was against capital punishment. All in all, he was against the policies that created the conditions of the reign of terror.
He did go crazy in his last year though and betrayed Danton and Desmoulins. So I’m not defending Robespierre but I do think his legacy is complicated.
Finally, to quote Mark Twain: “There were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror-that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.”
@@theREALChadsexinton Huh. I guess this is why we need history vs videos.
I would honestly love to see a video on Robespierre or Tito
I think I’m only speaking for myself here- but I’d love to see history vs Vlad the Impaler
While you can say he was a bloodthirsty vicious ruler, on the other side of the coin you *could* argue his brutality is because he was arguably the first true master of psychological warfare; definitely worth exploring at least
(NOTE: I am not picking sides; just proposing a potential idea)
A History v. Simón Bolivar would be really interesting
Oh, so you arent talking about how Freud "treated" young female patients that where abused by their male relatives? And instead to speak about the real problems, he diagnosed the victims with daddy issues and that the girls wanted "it" and it was their fault?
Yes, i know it was a different time but this is so messed up for me
Other people treated women bad back then too, and you are bound to make major mistakes when you find something new.
I'm not saying his actions are justifiable, I'm just saying that you have to consider his circumstances
I mean to be fair, he probably did not play therapy out of the goodness of his heart, or to help people. Rather to prove his theories, and Yea daddy issues do play a role in domestic abuse. I mean I would not say it would be the Women’s fault, but Much like a lot of Freud’s conjecture’s it would be perceived more sane not coming from him
He justified and gave a psudoscientofic outfit to what the male egoistic society wanted to do at that time.
I don't remember any case of Freud blaming their patients for being abused. You're probably treating a complicated subject in a superficial way, it's well documented that someone abused can actually feel pleasure, but that doesn't make it less horrible and neither is a reason for blaming the victim. Unfortunately these nuances are too complicated for the public.
Yeah, he was a nut
From a student getting my degree in philosophy and psychology, I seriously think the pro-Freud case is much stronger than this video makes it out to be
I looove these series! Please make more!!!!! I’m sure I’m not the only one bored out off my mind because of quarantine!
Please make a video on:
What if we fill the entire earth with water till atmosphere:
1. Water pressure on bottom of ocean?
2. Can earth crust sustain such pressure?
3. Total depth of ocean from Mariana trench to atmosphere?
4. Pressure on water molecule at bottom?
5. Any life can sustain under such pressure?
6. If crust collapse, then how mantle and water behave after mixing?
7. Earth's rotation and revolution behaviour?
8. Will water at top get out from space slowly?
9. Moon's behaviour?
I love how this episode took a turn, and it wasn't just about, was this historical figure a good or bad person, but rather do their ideas have any merit and should they be praised for their advancements. Well done Ted-Ed.
P.S PLEASE DO THESE MORE OFTEN. I BEGGING YOU THESE AREN'T PUT OUT OFTEN ENOUGH!!!
He wasn't right yet he wasn't wrong. But he wasn't.
He was aladdin
Me: Nothing interesting on UA-cam.
TED-Ed: Hold my Riddles and Knowledge.
"Order, order ! Today on the stand we have ... *dad* ?
(The Oedipus complex starts to grow a little stronger).
Please please continue this series... I have rewatched all the episodes multiple times...
Thanks for sponsoring this video 'cause if you hadn't then I wouldn't be able to watch it after 1 year.
4:20 HAHAHA The silence over that joke is incredibly well done.
I can't get enough of this series. Or the defendant's accent.
I know right?
Wow, that's exactly how I felt when I was studying Freud's theories. They gave us a lot to be developed, but they themselves cannot be taken too serious.
You’re drunk
those two lawyers be making my opinions go back and forth like pingpong lmao
There are still many people practicing psycho analysis and studies conducted over the years have shown that psycho analysis works. The problem with psycho analysis is that it is extremely expensive because it requires of years of multi weekly sessions.
My heart literally skipped a beat when I saw a new History vs.! I love this series so much, please keep making more
History V. Sir John A. Macdonald would be really cool - especially since Canadians still grapple with his legacy to this day.
I truly believe we all know who won.
He was a genius by far his imagination, innovation, and Balls are out of the chart.
Maybe we are changing and updating but if it wasn't for him many people would suffer forever.
who knows what would become of Yung and thousands of doctors not knowing their passion for the everyday unknown.
I think I'm addicted to this series but I finished all the episodes more please☺️
Headcanon names for the characters.
Maurice Leighton
Michael Clarke McDonald
Gordon Viceroy Adams
Bayar Sukhbaatar (From EP1)
René Adolfé Dicotre-Dubois. (From EP4)
Yuri Leninovich Tchaikovsky (Fron EP3)
Ian Craig Emmerick Nixon (From EP7)
Patrick Smith (From EP8)
I find this to be a very poor simplification of Freud’s ideas. No question that he was a man of his time, who’s views on many subjects are now outdated, but this video really lacks in subtlety. Just my opinion of course
And where would 'subtlety' get a debate anyway?
I agree... it simplifies a lot...
3:12 Objection! Certain behaviors have been shown to be hairtible in epigenetics studies on rats. More research should be conducted before just dismissing it all-together. The mechanism may have not been correct but the theory was not completely unfounded.
Objection! Hypotheses brought up without proof can be rejected without proof, if they seem less credible than the alternative. Given that this is fantastical, we can discount this unless Freud or his successors make a study about it.
Behavioural traits are partially genetic, experientially developed traits are not. So for example, a person whose father faced behavioural changes due to trauma will not develop those same traits.
@@ameyakirtane6050 yes, but if past generations kept facing the same exact trauma over and over it would eventually catch up to the present, not just physically but psychologically, as in when you see a cliff one would hesitate near it, even if they never had seen a height of great length before
@@Handlelesswithme There's a difference between behaviours generated through evolution and behaviours inherited from past trauma. We're not scared of heights because our ancestors faced the trauma of falling. We're scared because everyone who wasn't scared of heights died, and the only people left were those with the specific mutations which made them scared of heights, which they passed on to us. So it's not exactly the same as inheriting trauma.
@@ameyakirtane6050 yea, that is what I meant. It just mine wanted to relate more to the comment without brushing the specifics
As of now, I’m waiting for my psychology exam which should start in 12 minutes. And this popped into my recommendations.
Same I have a paper on criminal psychology tomorrow and I was literally studying Freud when this popped up.
My favorite series is back!! They need to do more History versus episodes!!
More videos please, we need more. I love this series.
I love these videos so much because they do such a great job representing both sides of the argument for and against a person. I’m honestly never sure what to think afterward.
Wait, how long was it since the last history vs?
Elias Stenman A year or so.
We are never so defenseless against suffering as when we love. - Sigmund Freud
please keep uploading this series
How did I miss this one for so long!? Every time I see this series continue brings me such joy
"His ideas are not falsifiable" while showing a scale that looks like a cross.
Maybe i'm interpret to much into this, but that's funny.
A little projection
@@nietzschesmustache9483 I was never crucified, haha.
Freud recognized that his methods were woefully short of being scientific,
Not a great episode IMO. A lot of vague generalities without specifics. "He viewed homosexuality as a developmental glitch." Meaning what? That he proposed it was a deep part of a person's identity and not an arbitrary choice? Isn't that progress? "His theories were non-falsifiable." Like what? I can actually think of an example of this, but it shocks me TED-ED couldn't provide any when they did the research to make this video.
I can't get enough of these videos. Good job
"The Forgotten Language" by Freud's student Erich Fromm!
An excellent example on how the greatest intuitive mind has approached one subject, sleep. The fact that his approach was prone to corrections doesn't make it wrong.
2:20 Weird looking head there.
Honestly, I love this series! How about "History vs. Louis XIV the Sun King"?
Im actually happy you featured "Why We Sleep", I've an ebook, but I've yet to read it 😊
I read once about some mice that were being tested on for fear-related study. The mice's family that were given reasons to fear sounds (probably by inducing pain) and the offspring of those mice were scared by the sounds even when the mice's offspring were NOT given a reason to be afraid of the sounds. The control group of mice (who were not induced pain) were unaffected by the sounds.
I wonder if the things described at 3:30 could be explained by those trials.
Interesting idea, and there is some stuff in Freud to suggest he was speaking biologically. However, I think for the most part he is talking about culturally passed-on psychological structures (think like generational trauma).
We just learned about him in Gen psych. There was so many things of his theories that was pretty crazy and made no sense. Some actually are right, but others are just plain wrong.