Talk:Primal therapy

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Randroide in topic What a mess

What a mess


Much of this article, dumped from a contentious Wikipedia page, reads like an annotated bibliography rather than a collection of noteworthy quotations. I have removed some parts that are patently not quotations. I am sorely tempted to just nominate the whole thing for deletion. ~ Ningauble 19:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Why do you want to delete quotations from Wikiquote?. Randroide 11:20, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Reply
Well, I was tempted but I didn't. Recall that Wikiquote's mission is different from Wikipedia's: Wikipedia aims to provide summary coverage of the state of knowledge on a topic, while Wikiquote seeks to collect gems of pithy, eloquent, and poignant expression, and to compile our legacy of widely quoted statements.
Remarks like "all but abandoned, especially due to a lack of evidence," "since there is no relevant research, ... could simply be chalked up as a placebo," "cannot be defended on scientifically established principles," etc. are quite ordinary and dry statements such as have been made innumerable times about countless subjects. Also, the topic itself is rather narrow for a Wikiquote theme. In an article on a broader theme, such as skepticism or fringe practices in general, or psychotherapy in particular, most of these quotes would not stand out.
That said, there are lots of other problem articles, and current cleanup efforts are focused elsewhere. There are also certainly a lot of grey areas in community consensus. I am just sharing my perspective, since you asked. ~ Ningauble 14:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Reply
Is there any rule about Wikiquote topics requiring them to be "broad"??? (???). Quotes are well sourced and on topic. I fail to see any problem apart from the fact that all quotes are contra. Somo pro quotes would be great here. Thanks for sharing your thoughts (and for improving my English language vocabulary :-) ). Randroide 09:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Not Neutral


This article is an attack on Primal Therapy. It should be noted that (1) If Freud had continued in the original direction he was going, he may have discovered it; (2) When Frank Lake (Clinical Theology) found out about Primal Therapy, he switched to it rather than using LSD (3)Those who are able to get into their feelings and have Primals, report significant change; (4) Those who cannot have Primals because of the level of Pain they are in do not get well, obviously; (5) besides studies of stress hormone levels or blood pressure studies before and after Primals, and the like, there may not be a way to report objective evidence and make Primal Therapy evidence-based; (6) There is no way to make any Psychodynamic Therapy evidence-based; (7) There is no criteria in any modality (Behaviorist, Cognitive, Psychodynamic, etc) for which one can say one is "cured" of neurosis.

Return to "Primal therapy" page.