Journal for General Philosophy of Science

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 329–350 | Cite as

The Seven Strategies of the Sophisticated Pseudo-Scientist: a look into Freud's rhetorical tool box

  • Athony A. Derksen


In my ‘Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science’ (Journal for General Philosophy of Science 1993) I argued against Grünbaum that Freud commits all Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science. Yet how does Freud manage to fool many people, including such a sophisticated person as Grünbaum? My answer is that Freud is a sophisticated pseudo-scientist, using all Seven Strategies of the Sophisticated Pseudo-Scientist to keep up appearances, to wit, (1) the Humble Empiricist, (2) the Severe Selfcriticism, (3) the Unbiased Me, (4) the Striking but Irrelevant Example, (5) the Proof Given Elsewhere, (6) the Favorable Compromise, and (7) the Display of Methodological Sophistication. One should note that not all strategies are disreputable in themselves. But all are used very cunningly so as to hide weaknesses in Freud's arguments. To be fair, quite a few of his methodological remarks are sophisticated enough. As Freud combines these sophisticated remarks with an appalling methodology in practice, I call him a sophisticated pseudo-scientist. I do not claim that these rhetorical strategies are specific to him.

pseudo-science rhetorical strategies humbleempiricism sophisticated pseudo-scientist Freud 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Cioffi, F.: 1988, ‘“Exegetical Myth-making” in Grünbaum's Indictment of Popper and Exoneration of Freud', in P. Clark & C. Wright (eds): 1988, Mind, Psychoanalysis and Science, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Derksen, A. A.: 1992, ‘Does the Tally Argument Make Freud a Sophisticated Methodologist? Grünbaum's Friendly Attempt to Save Freud as a Methodologist', Philosophy of Science 59, 75-101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Derksen, A. A.: 1993, ‘The Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science', Journal for General Philosophy of Science 24, 17-42.Google Scholar
  4. Freud, S.: 1886, ‘The Aetiology of Hysteria', The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud 3 (S.E. 3).Google Scholar
  5. Freud, S.: 1905, ‘A Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria’ (Dora), S.E. 7.Google Scholar
  6. Freud, S.: 1906, ‘My Views on the Part Played by Sexuality in the Aetiology of the Neuroses', S.E. 7.Google Scholar
  7. Freud, S.: 1909a, ‘Analysis of a Phobia in a Five-year Old Boy’ (Little Hans), S.E. 10.Google Scholar
  8. Freud, S.: 1909b, ‘Notes upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis’ (Ratman), S.E. 10.Google Scholar
  9. Freud, S.: 1910, ‘Five Lectures on Psycho-analysis’ (1910), S.E. 11.Google Scholar
  10. Freud, S.: 1912, Recommendations to Physicians Practicing Psycho-analysis', S.E. 12 Freud, S.: 1913, ‘The Unconscious', S.E. 14.Google Scholar
  11. Freud, S.: 1914a, ‘Remembering, Repeating and Working-Through (Further Recommendations on the Technique of Psycho-analysis II)', S.E. 12.Google Scholar
  12. Freud, S.: 1914b, ‘The Moses of Michelangelo', S.E. 14.Google Scholar
  13. Freud, S.: 1914c, ‘On the History of the Psycho-analytic Movement', S.E. 14.Google Scholar
  14. Freud, S.: 1915a, ‘A Case of Paranoia Running Counter to the Psycho-analytic Theory of Disease', S.E.14.Google Scholar
  15. Freud, S.: 1915b, ‘The Repression', S.E. 14.Google Scholar
  16. Freud, S.: 1915c, ‘Instinct and their Vicissitudes', S.E 14.Google Scholar
  17. Freud, S.: 1916-17, Introductory Lectures on Psycho-analysis, S.E. 15 and 16.Google Scholar
  18. Freud, S.: 1918, ‘From the History of an Infantile Neurosis’ (Wolfman), S.E. 17.Google Scholar
  19. Freud, S.: 1923, ‘Remarks on the Theory and Practice of Dream Interpretation', S.E. 19.Google Scholar
  20. Freud, S.: 1924, ‘Resistances to Psycho-analysis', S.E. 19.Google Scholar
  21. Freud, S.: 1925, ‘An Autobiographical Study', S.E. 20.Google Scholar
  22. Freud, S.: 1926, ‘The Question of Lay Analysis: Conversations with an Impartial Person', S.E. 20.Google Scholar
  23. Freud, S.: 1933, ‘Revision of the Theory of Dreams', S.E. 22.Google Scholar
  24. Freud, S.: 1937, ‘Construction in Analysis', S.E. 23Google Scholar
  25. Freud, S.: 1938, ‘Moses and Monotheism', S.E. 23.Google Scholar
  26. Glymour, C.: 1980, Theory and Evidence, Princeton U.P, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  27. Grünbaum, A.: 1984, The Foundations of Psycho-analysis: A Philosophical Critique, University of California Press, Berkeley, Cal.Google Scholar
  28. Popper, K. R.: 1963, ‘Science: Conjectures and Refutations', in: Conjectures and Refutations, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  29. Popper, K. R.: 1974, ‘Replies to my critics', in: Schilpp, P. A. (ed), The Philosophy of Karl Popper, Open Court, Lasalle, Illinois.Google Scholar
  30. Joseph Wolpe & Stanley Rachman: 1960, ‘Psychoanalytic ‘evidence': A Critique based on Freud's case of Little Hans', The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 130, no, 8, pp. 135-148. Reprinted in: H.J. Eysenck & G.D Wilson (eds): 1972, The Experimental Study of Freudian Theories, Methuen, London, 317-341.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Athony A. Derksen
    • 1
  1. 1.NijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations