Is Primal Therapy Science?

This is an important question because advocates of primal therapy, including Arthur Janov have claimed that it is indeed science.  “It may seem that Primal Therapy is miraculous, but it is not magic, it is science at work” Janov claimed. Indeed his second book The Anatomy of Mental Illness (1971) was hailed on it’s own back cover as “the scientific basis of Primal Therapy.”  Similarly, Janov’s more recent books also lay claim to a scientific basis as demonstrated by the title and contents in The Biology of Love (2000).  This is further illustrated on the Primal Center’s website www.primaltherapy.com in which the subtitle to the main page is “where primal therapy is a science” (as of December 2006).

 

First of all, to answer this question, we have to know what science is.

Do most people think they know what science is?

Usually yes.

How many actually do know it?

   

How many could say what the necessary elements of scientific study are?

Think about it before reading on; see if you can list them yourself. 

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

……….

 

You may be surprised, as I was. I found I didn’t actually know it and I was sure I did (I had studied science at undergraduate level and it turned out I didn’t even know what it is! I wonder how common this is).

Bear with me as we go through these essential parts of science, any one of these may seem irrelevant at first, but each element is important information that shouldn’t be left out to get a whole picture.

 

What is science, is it subject matter or equipment?

Science is NOT defined by subject matter or by the equipment used. Rather it is a way of thinking about and observing the world that leads to a deep understanding of its workings.  This is important because this means human behavior, cognitions and emotions CAN be studied scientifically, but it is only classified as science if it is done according to the rules of science.  Related to this is the important point: A scientist is only a scientist so long as he continues to do science.  So, for example, if a physicist starts doing astrology instead of astronomy, he or she is no longer a practicing scientist - even though he will probably continue to use his PhD label for credibility and influence.  There are PhDs in most subjects who intellectually abuse the public in this way.

 

Systematic Empiricism

“Observation is fine and necessary, but pure unstructured observation of the natural world will not lead to scientific knowledge”…”Scientific observation is termed systematic because it is structured so that the results of the observation reveal something about the underlying nature of the world.” Stanovich¹ p10 (2001)

 

Briefly On Experiments

To qualify as an experiment, you need to manipulate one variable, while keeping others constant, and you need random or representative sampling.  In psychology (and medicine), random assignment to the various experimental groups (which is different from random sampling) is an essential necessity in experiments, and clinical tests.  Without random assignment it is NOT a scientific experiment or clinical study (see CHECKING THE SCIENCE section subheading on the Rose / Janov Imipramine study for an example of a study done without random assignment to relevant comparisons).

 

 

( The essentials of science are continued in the next section:

3. Falsifiability - is primal testable? (Do not skip this one just because it is a long name! Please!  Click on “3″ on the menu to go to the next part of the article)

 

 

¹How to Think Straight About Psychology (6th Edition). (2001, IBSN 0-321-04713-3)  Keith E. Stanovich.  If this book is not easily available, try the latest  8^th Edition (2006)