Freud and Jung: The Ethical Dilemma at the Heart of Psychoanalysis

While their legacy is undeniable, their methods raise questions about the ethics of basing therapeutic practices on unverified ideas

The names Freud and Jung loom large over psychology, their theories forming the bedrock of many modern approaches to understanding the mind. Yet, their ideas are deeply flawed, built on assumptions and subjective interpretations rather than empirical evidence. While their legacy is undeniable, their methods raise questions about the ethics of basing therapeutic practices on unverified ideas.

The Dual Legacy of Freud and Jung

It is impossible to overstate the impact of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung on the worlds of psychology and philosophy. Without their contributions, the landscape of counselling and psychotherapy might be unrecognisable today - if it existed at all. Their exploration of the conscious and unconscious mind ignited a cross-disciplinary quest to understand human behaviour and experience. Yet, for all their influence, their work was born in an era devoid of competing theories or rigorous scientific validation, leaving their ideas resting more on intuition than fact.

A Tale of Two Childhoods

To understand the origins of their theories, we must first understand their lives.

Freud, born in 1856 in Moravia (modern-day Czech Republic), was the first and favoured child of his mother, who called him her golden Sigi. This dynamic influenced his later theories, particularly his exploration of the mother-son relationship and the infamous Oedipus complex. Freud himself credited his mother’s adoration with his confidence and success in The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to Wilhelm Fliess, writing, “When you were incontestably the favourite child of your mother, you keep during your lifetime this victor feeling, you keep feeling sure of success”.

Jung’s childhood, in contrast, was marked by solitude and instability. Born in 1875 in Switzerland to a pastor father and a mother fascinated by the occult, Jung’s upbringing was a mix of religion, medicine, and mysticism. At the age of three, Jung’s mother was hospitalised for a breakdown, leaving him separated from her for months. This experience deeply shaped his development, leading him to spend much of his time alone, contemplating ideas that would later evolve into his theories on projection and alchemy.

When Freud Met Jung

The two men’s paths crossed in 1906 when Jung sent Freud a copy of his book, Studies in Word-Association. Their meeting the following year marked the beginning of a close relationship that lasted nearly six years. Jung idolised Freud, describing their friendship as akin to that of father and son. Freud, in turn, referred to Jung as his “son and heir.”

However, their intellectual partnership eventually fractured. Jung challenged two of Freud’s central assumptions: first, that human motivation is primarily sexual, and second, that the unconscious mind is entirely personal. Freud, steadfast in his beliefs, refused to compromise, and their relationship ended in 1913.

Flaws in the Foundations

Both Freud and Jung relied heavily on intuition and personal interpretation, with little empirical evidence to support their claims. Freud’s concept of the unconscious, for instance, was based entirely on his own ideas about consciousness. Without significant research to substantiate it, his theories - such as psychosexual development and dream analysis - rested on what can only be described as opinion.

Dream interpretation, a cornerstone of Freud’s psychodynamic therapy, required practitioners to adopt his subjective framework. This made the practice more of an art than a science, with its effectiveness dependent on the individual therapist’s skill and insight. No one could fully replicate Freud’s methods, as they relied so heavily on his unique perspective.

Jung’s theories, while diverging from Freud’s, were similarly speculative. He rejected Freud’s emphasis on sexual desire and introduced the concept of the collective unconscious - a repository of shared human experiences and archetypes. While intriguing, this idea was built on Freud’s model of the unconscious, meaning it inherited the same foundational weaknesses. Jung’s theories often veered into the spiritual and mystical, offering fascinating philosophical insights but lacking the rigour of scientific validation.

The Ethical Dilemma

This reliance on unverified ideas raises significant ethical concerns. Freud and Jung’s therapies treated individuals based on subjective, often inconsistent frameworks, effectively turning personal opinion into professional practice. Is it ethical to base therapeutic methods on ideas that cannot be reliably tested or replicated?

It could be argued that basing a therapeutic approach like psychodynamic therapy on the ideas of Freud and Jung invites parallels with grounding therapy in other interpretive frameworks, such as the Bible. Both rely on symbolic narratives, subjective interpretations, and philosophical assumptions rather than empirical validation. While psychodynamic therapy has undoubtedly provided profound insights into human behaviour and continues to be an effective tool for many, its foundation on unproven theories raises questions about the ethical implications of applying such methods in practice.

Does relying on a framework that is, at its core, interpretative and subjective risk introducing personal biases or inconsistencies into therapy? This is not to dismiss psychodynamic therapy, which has helped countless individuals, but rather to encourage deeper reflection on how these foundations impact the practice, its reliability, and its ethical standing in a field increasingly shaped by evidence-based approaches.

Their work, while transformative, highlights the dangers of applying unproven theories to real-world practice. It underscores the need for evidence-based approaches in psychology - something their era lacked but modern practitioners must prioritise.

A Balanced Reflection

To critique Freud and Jung is not to dismiss their importance. Without their pioneering efforts, the field of psychology would not have advanced to where it is today. Their ideas challenged prevailing notions of the mind and opened the door to deeper exploration of human behaviour and experience.

However, it is crucial to approach their work with a critical eye. Their theories, while revolutionary, are best understood as philosophical musings rather than scientific truths. To ignore their flaws is to risk perpetuating the ethical and moral challenges inherent in their methods.

Freud and Jung’s legacy is one of contradiction: flawed, subjective, and speculative, yet undeniably foundational. They laid the groundwork for a discipline that has since moved towards greater empirical and ethical standards. As we continue to explore the complexities of the human mind, we should honour their contributions while recognising the importance of building on their work with evidence, rigour, and care.