• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    The point is you can reduce anything to its origin.

    Okay, but how does the modern version of cathartic theory differ from what freud postulated?

    I agree you can’t reduce things based on its original alone , which is why I included a scientific source as evidence…

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I don’t know, that’s why I have a therapist, I’m not educated in psychology. But I do recognize a logical fallacy when I see one.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        But I do recognize a logical fallacy when I see one.

        I doubt that, so far your argument has been based on the anecdotal fallacy mixed with a bit of the appeal to authority fallacy.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Lmao. Says the guy who tried to use a study on aggression to address sexual urges.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Reading comprehension is still hard for you? My argument was about Cathartic theory, which includes several emotions including sexual urges… It is a theory from freud, of course it covers sexual urges.

            You and the other guy just have no idea what you’re talking about. How about providing any kind of source instead of talking out of your ass?