Linné and Freud

In the past few years, there has been quite a stir about Freud, claims that he changes his basic aetiological theory, according to which the mental sufferings of adult age were due to sexual seduction in childhood. Freud deserted from the truth in his “seduction theory” because of his great need to become famous and popular!

This line of thought has led me to reflect on two questions: firstly, concerning alterations in basic theory, the zoologist Ernst Mayr (1984) in his authoritative work on the history of biology, writes that theoretical alterations are, on the contrary, the rule with important thinkers. The best example of this, he writes, is, Carolus Linnaeus. So far it has not been the case that the circumstances surrounding theoretical “conversions” have been systematically studied. But it is for this reason that I have chosen to compare Linné and Freud in this paper. Secondly, there is the question of how to describe a theory concisely enough so as to be able to elucidate it prior to and after the “great change”. Is it correct to characterize Freud's first theory as the seduction theory?

The problem of giving a short and simple rendering of a theory can be nicely illustrated by the following legend:

It happened that a certain heathen came before Shammai and said to him: “Convert me on condition that you teach me the entire Torah while I am standing on one foot.” Shammai drove him away with the builder's measuring stick that was in his hand. He then came before Hillel who converted him. Hillel said to him, “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. This is the entire Torah; the rest is commentary - go and learn it”.

This is perhaps one of the most laconic and elegant resumés of a piece of great learning that has ever been voiced. It would be presumptuous of me