In a message dated 10/19/99 7:12:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, sgabriel@willamette.edu writes: << I have about eight (perhaps 9) other things to say on the subject but as I can't be very certain that anyone but myself cares I'll keep them to myself for now. Sorry about the length of this all but my "work" involves delving into Phil of Mind and Phil of Language quite often and it's impossible to pass up an audience (and so much more fun than parsing through papers). =) S. >> I bascially agree with the ideas presented in your post, but I think you're trivializing Freud in a mistaken way. It's right to trivialize psychoanalytic theory as a valid scientific discipline today. It's mistaken to trivialize it in the history of human thought. In many significant ways Freud is the father of modern psychology, separating the study of human psychology from religion and philosophy and establishing it as a scientific discipline in itself. Of course, as subsequent history has shown, apart from studies of the brain as a biological organism human psychology can't really be studied apart from quasi-philosophical or religious modes of thought, unless you really are a behaviorist of some kind. And very few are straight behaviorists either. Jim