How does modern psychology view Freud and Jung?

Answer

Psychology itself doesn’t really exist. You could speak more of supporters of different schools. For example, there are authors who still strongly support the ideas of Freud, etc. (at Ghent University these are, for example, Paul Verhaege and Stijn Vanheule). A number of other people, who hold other schools, say that psychoanalysis played a historical role in response to the prudish Victorian thinking of the time.

In response to this, a counter-movement has arisen which argued that all that ‘unconscious’ thinking was too speculative, and that one should look at ‘observable behaviour’ and what precedes and follows it (behaviorism, behavioral therapy). In response to this behaviorism – which sought to gather knowledge through animal experiments (Pavlow’s dog is well-known) – there has been a reaction from humanism that stated that humans are not animals, but that they need recognition and appreciation. ed

But there was also a response to this, namely systems thinking that stated that a person cannot be seen in itself, but must be viewed in an environment (how does the environment react to someone, etc.). So there are four major schools of thought within psychology: psychoanalysis with Freud, (neo) behaviorism, humanism, and systems thinking.

Freud certainly has historical significance. The followers of Freud now also often fulfill a ‘whistleblower function’ by saying that we should not be too quick to put labels on people, etc.

Yet it is true that there is indeed not much therapeutic benefit in treating/approaching a number of problems in a purely Freudian way. Autism, ADHD, and learning disabilities are problems that should not be viewed or tackled as Freudian. After all, there is leading scientific evidence for biological causes (eg things in the brain) that go wrong. A psychoanalytic view of these problems is therefore not such a good idea (see film ‘le mur’).

However, we should not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Psychoanalytic ideas have historical value and we can certainly learn from the past. Moreover, it is true that an environment can ‘mess up’ children and cause problems that you could then explain psychoanalytically. However, most real problems are caused by other things and you have to approach them differently.