Precious little psychology, fewer facts.

I have listened to the first three of the lectures in this course, and I have to say I am finding it increasingly irritating and off subject. The lecturer spends the first lecture attacking Science. He claims it is untrustworthy because Newton got the law of gravity wrong. One wished for a quiet clearing of the throat and a gentle voice from the back of the lecture theatre which would point out to him that it was not wrong so to speak, but necessarily incomplete. This quiet academic scientist would point out that Newton was a man of his time and had not included space-time, quantum mechanics, or relativity, but had been as honest and objective as any human being had ever been in his examination of the world as it existed beyond his belief system. The physicist would add that, notwithstanding its incompleteness, the Newtonian theory with its rules of the mechanics of gravity is still useful for most of us, even in the Einsteinian universe, as long as we stay below light-speed. Unfortunately there was no such interruption. In the absence of rebuttal the lecturer was free to run on with his tautological “proofs” that science can not be used as a measure, and that there is no established scientific method, meaning we must fall back on the revealed word of some enlightened authority, yet to be mentioned.

In lecture two he meanders through the Greeks. He appears to be seeking more proof that the senses can not be trusted. He begins cherry picking Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Hippocrates, Pythagoras, and others so that he can say what you know is more important than what you can prove. He seems to come to the conclusion that the spiritual concept of a mind is a logically superior one. He again skilfully suggests that the Greeks arrived at this very conclusion: that enlightened revelation was the only thing that could be trusted and that you already know all you need to know internally and that the mind is naturally front-loaded with the fundamental truths of the universe; only that our fleshy senses occlude them from us.

Ahem... On to lecture three... Witches…! Here one of the most breathtakingly tortuous pieces of logic takes shape. The long and the short of it is that because the finding of witches during the 16th century (also the century of Galileo and Newton, the lecturer hastens to point out) involved expert opinion from those who had made a science out of it, by producing experts science is guilty of trying to explain things that have no explanation. He actually seems to equate the efforts of scientific enlightenment, rather than religious bigotry, with the witch trials. I waited for the explanation that the “science” of witch finding was based on the clearly religious/supernatural starting point of a belief in pacts with the devil, and a belief in the intereference in human affairs of the devil, and the belief in the entity known as the devil; and that this was considered to be one of those fundamental truths of the universe that people “just knew” for three centuries. It would have explained that his opposition to scientifically honest enquiry had been a joke. I waited in vain. He stuck to his guns. He says that the evidence may show, but he is not sure, that the secular state was worse in its treatment of witches (witches, not women accused of imaginary witchcraft, I noted throughout!) than the religious authorities. After giving it three hours of my life, little doubt was left in my mind that this guy has an agenda, and it is not the exploration of psychology as a fact based discipline.

I wondered why a lecturer on psychology would take three lectures to state that Science is unacceptably deterministic, and then to muddy the waters with conjecture rather than facts (he frequently uses the phrase the evidence “may show” rather than “does show”)? I looked ahead with the provided PDF at the forthcoming lectures, and the mists cleared a bit. I suspect that our man is a Freudian. These days the main criticism aimed at Freud is that he did not use any scientific method but did all he could to conceal his failures and explain anything that did not agree with his theories as some sort of concealment or unconscious lies on the part of his patients. There are three lectures directly dealing with Freud and the third, which proposes dealing with criticisms of Freud, does not introduce any real criticism or questions about his methods and theories, but merely doubles down on Freud and how he is above criticism.

While there is some argument for philosophy continuing to burden itself with religious and spiritual questions of supernatural prime movers, I find it hard to excuse a set of lectures about psychology in the 21st century for dredging the murky waters of the philosophy of religion and superstition, looking for explanations of human behaviour and seeking to side step cause and effect. This set of lectures seems to attempt to prove, through carefully chosen philosophical and semantically suspect arguments, that psychology, psycho analysis in particular, is beyond the reach of scientific rigour. It will be just the stuff for you if you have a desire to see the world through the prism of a mystical dualism or a supernatural mind/soul wedded to a physical body in a demon haunted world. For anyone interested in the psychology of actual human beings in the real world, I suggest you do as I intend to do, and look elsewhere.

11 people found this helpful

Perfect!

I'm taking an Intro to Psychology class. The Great Ideas of Psychology is the perfect supplement. I've re-listened to several chapters whilst studying relevant information in class.

This audiobook is very enjoyable. No prior knowledge of psychology is needed, however this is not an audiobook that can be listened to passively. Many of the concepts presented require your full attention. I've often had to pause the audiobook and take a moment to process the information Id just heard.

I've enjoyed this book very much and would recommend it highly to sony one with a serious interest in Psychology.

10 people found this helpful

Interesting, but...

The lecturer's engaging, the irrelevant, cringeworthy and insulting references to autism less so. It was jarring to be listening to a lecture and then have, well, basically my very existence lamented. This had happened a couple of times with these psychology lectures. It's like there is some sort of death drive for the lecturers to refer, by the way, to The Tragedy of Autism. It's really unhelpful for them to be perpetuating that view. Autistic people (who are very various across the "spectrum") can face challenges, sure, but bring referred to as tragic is (for the many of us who reject that rhetoric) one of them. It feels awkward to pay money to be insulted and discriminated against. On the upside, the lecturer is really charismatic.

18 people found this helpful

Excellent

A well-structured course of lectures, with each lecture summarised at the start and recapped at the end. Not quite the flair of Prof. Martin's Psychology lectures,-- sometimes he gives the impression of having given the lectures on one too many occasions. Nonetheless, highly recommended. I've no background in psychology but I've now listened to two courses of Psychology lectures -- as well as the audiobook of Ruby Wax's Sane New World.

7 people found this helpful

Quite, quite basic.

Would you try another book written by The Great Courses or narrated by Professor Daniel N. Robinson?

Professor Robinson's voice takes some getting used to.

Would you be willing to try another book from The Great Courses? Why or why not?

Yes, I'll be more selective about the subject matter.

What do you think the narrator could have done better?

Modulate his voice.

2 people found this helpful

Great introductory course

Would you consider the audio edition of The Great Ideas of Psychology to be better than the print version?

This course was structured as 30-35 minutes lectures, which each of them covers an individual topic. Perfect for my daily commute.

Who was your favorite character and why?

The lecturer,who is very articulate and has a good sense of humour.

Any additional comments?

The course covers a wide range of topics in Psychology. Since this is a relatively young discipline, the lecture also attempts to provide a historic view. In addition, prof. Robinson is enthusiastic about the subject, which make it interesting and easy to follow.

2 people found this helpful

great course

loved it, comprehensive overview. I learned so much from witch craft to mental illness, homosexuality , fundamental attribution error etc , amazing stuff . it's also beautifully narrated, bravo.

2 people found this helpful

A stimulating tour de force

Where does The Great Ideas of Psychology rank among all the audiobooks you’ve listened to so far?

One of the best audiobooks I have listened to, and kept me engaged for all of the 23 hours.

Who was your favorite character and why?

The narrator.

What does Professor Daniel N. Robinson bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you had only read the book?

n/a

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

Impossible: it's 23 hours long.

Any additional comments?

Thought-provoking and erudite.

5 people found this helpful

Excellent Overview

Thoroughly enjoyed this course; Professor Robinson is my favourite teacher and lecturer. He surveys the full breadth of the psychological landscape with marked sagacity. The only thing to note is that these lectures are quite philosophically orientated; focusing a fair bit on the philosophical realities and implications of the various approaches to psychology.

1 person found this helpful

Great Courses Psychology courses really dire

This is the second Great Courses psychology related course I have tried to listen to. First time I thought it was because the course was an intro to the subject. I had higher hopes for this one. I found the course content really dull and boring, giving no real info. Verbose and academic. I am interested in psychology for a variety of personal and professional reasons. There are far better resources for psychology. I have like Great Courses material previously but having to bad experiences in a row I am reconsidering my preference for them.

3 people found this helpful