Top10 - Theories in Psychology That Aren't Nonsense? - Part 1

Seem about right?

Along with Freud, what’s conjured is the tendency for many psychologists to support wild theories with flimsy evidence. Freud himself was notorious for this. He once proposed that dreams are the result of hidden wish fulfillments that haven’t been satisfied during waking life. When a young woman once approached Freud and told him that many of her dreams were, in fact, nightmares – and that she had no wish whatsoever to fulfill any of her horrendous dreams – Freud replied that, as a woman, she was naturally a contrarian. That she was simply out to disprove his theory and having poor dreams was representative of a hidden desire to disprove him.

Freud used to tell people that if they enjoy manipulating things in their mouth that they're secretly reverting back to a mental stage where this is prominent during infancy. When critics then asked Freud if the same were true of himself because of his tendency to smoke about two-dozen cigars every day, he famously replied that sometimes a cigar...is simply a cigar. And that’s what many people think of when they picture the average psychologist – someone making up mostly unprovable theories about mental faculties that inspire nothing more than armchair conversation.

In reality, there are actually many theories within psychology that not only make sense, but are testable and have been well-documented. These are the theories which, instead of discussing some tedious aspect of humanity with untestable theories, have pierced through to the inner layer of the average human psyche to reveal many of the similar foundations which exist in all of us.

5. Childhood relationships with caregivers form lasting impressions into adulthood.

This isn’t one of those how-you-act-in-childhood-determines-your-adult-personality slogans. Many theories which relate childhood to adulthood overstate the importance of minor details, make Western growth morales universal, and generally seek psychological reductionism. Simply put, though, the transactions and tribulations you experience with your primary caregiver(s) during infancy, youth and adolescence carve a strong portion of your entrenched thinking later on. This includes patterns of thinking, instinctive reactions to environmental situations and expectations about both life and other people. Especially future partners and bosses.

Let’s use psychologist Harry Harlow as an example. Harlow was that famous psychologist who once demonstrated that motherly love is much more important to infant monkeys than mere sustenance. Up till his day, people figured that infants loved their mothers because those mothers provided the means of survival. However, Harlow showed that a soft, warm mother-like figure – even if it was completely fake and offered no sustenance whatsoever – was routinely sought-out much more often than even a real mother or a cold, shabby fake-mother that offered nourishment. Harlow's monkeys would cling happily to a fake but fuzzy cloth-structure roughly shaped like a mother. Meanwhile, he'd fashioned a crude and wiry setup that provided nourishment to see which structure the infacts would prefer.

Harlow's mothering apparatus.

However, the initial assessment turned out premature. Harlow later learned that when those same monkeys grew up, many became socially maladapted. Instead of a normal continuum of responses, many would swing violently between clingy and destructively aggressive behaviors. Some would tear at their body and habitually shred paper or cloth. Even as fully-grown adults, they felt a need to cling to soft, furry objects over normal social interaction and seemed not to notice that it lowered their social status. Though they could still interact somewhat with other monkeys, few could successfully mate – and the few that did could not properly care for their young. Clearly, the lack of a response from the warm, fuzzy fake mother created a misaligned development. They had no idea which behaviors were acceptable, or the normal give-and-take of species-interactions - reinforcing the theories within psychology that the connection itself with one's primary caregiver and the lessons learned are what transfers to adulthood.

Likewise, psychologist Karen Horney (pronounced "horn-eye") also proposed that dispositions in childhood – and specifically one’s inability to move pas them into adult-oriented patterns of thinking – were the progenitors of neurosis. An example is the need for constant and continual gratification during infancy, or the need to see and be near a primary caregiver for longer than is usual or necessary. The neurotic tendencies we may have acquired during childhood, she wrote, are no longer necessary. If we leave them behind, we can fulfill our potential.

Horney wrote that neuroses stemmed from situations basic to infant-life, including lack of love or the opposite, smothering; lack of guidance, attention or respect for the child, conditional love, inconsistent rules, isolation from other children, a hostile atmosphere, domination, etcetera. All of these imply a lack of proper connection, rather than an absence thereof.

4. People rarely expose their true thoughts and feelings, but rather play mental games to avoid one-on-one intimacy.

Let's be honest with each other: people are rarely honest about their true thoughts and feelings. Psychologist Eric Berne, author of Games People Play, once wrote that people play games as a substitute for real intimacy, and every game (however irrational or negative) has a specific ‘payoff’ for one or both players. Berne defined a game as “an ongoing series of complementary ulterior transactions progressing to a well-defined, predictable outcome.” People play hidden mental games to satisfy a lately motivation – and it always involves a payoff. So to expose this veil in regular everyday transactions with people, begin by asking yourself what motives each received transaction from someone carries. Guaranteed, everyone has a motive for almost all of the things they say – and the more unconscious this motive is to the person themselves, the more power their emotions routinely have.

Within Games People Play, Berne outlines several games that many of you have undoubtedly witnessed or been a part of. The “If it weren’t for you…” game is one that individuals play to avoid responsibility. It’s a game that people will either play internally to avoid responsibility for poor choices in a lifetime, or directly with a spouse or partner to avoid blame for poor outcomes. One member creates a fictitious environment that's much better because the other partner hadn't held them back.

Or the downtrodden person who wants solace because they’ve received a poor situation, but when offered advice, immediately creates a reason the problem cannot be resolved so easily. Tthe situation becomes a “Why don’t you – Yes, but…” exchange. In this game, an individual enjoys your solace but manages to find more and more reasons for not being able to remedy a poor situation they’re in. However, rather than admitting they have a need to be empathized with, that their troubles need to be understood as insurmountable and extreme, the individual realizes that these do not flow with society because they are childlike. So the hidden needs are covered with a latent intent. A game that Berne calls the “Wooden Leg” is also surprisingly popular, in which an individual overstates the degree to which something is debilitating their life in an effort to make up for poor decisions or tough situations.

A cast performs "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf", by Edward Albee.
Perhaps the best example possible of common ulterior interactions.

“Once we understand positions and games, freedom of response begins to emerge as a real possibility.”
--Thomas Harris

Harris once wrote that the only way in which an individual could make free, informed choices was to understand the hidden motivations that come from instincts and emotional responses – then to rise above these and rationally choose a reaction that suits one’s character. To Harris, there are instinctive patterns which one can react to in almost any given situation – and that sometimes we unthinkingly assume one of these ‘patterns’ of response without thinking. It is in correctly discerning these patterns that one can rise above them.

Horney also wrote of the hidden motivations individuals have guiding their actions that few will admit to. Whether we just don’t wan to admit we have certain feelings, perhaps because they are socially unacceptable or somewhat megalomanic – or perhaps because we are not entirely aware of their existence – Horney wrote that the way to expose these hidden motivations within people is to watch for discrepancies in their professed motivations and their actual actions.

Every behavior carries a motive. Remember this when interacting with someone; you will notice motives within most sentences, gestures and reactions. It is in correctly identifying the motives behind each that you’ll be able to see if a person is simply catering to unconscious needs or is going against their stated motivation.