Entry 5 : What I feel about little Hans and Freud after reading his case study on little Hans

I think Freud is rather a risk-taker. He seems to be guessing half the details of little Han's condition. I think his theories are somewhat believable, somewhat unrealistic, and somewhat biased. His ideas about little Hans connecting a carriage to his mother being pregnant is possible. However, Freud's connection about Hans' fear of horses and his fear of his father and his fear of his mother giving birth is very opinionated. Most of his ideas are merely his deductions from given information. The Oedipal conflict is also very doubtful. I feel that it is impossible for all human beings to develop similarly psychologically. I think it depends on the parents of the child. A good example is an orphant, who can never face the Oedipal conflict, since he/she does not have a parent to begin with. However, I could say that Freud is sucessful because little Hans recovered from his conflict. I think Freud focuses too much of his attention on the link between our sexual drive and our mind. I don't think that most of the things we do are motivated by our sexual drive, especially for little children. Therefore, I feel that Freud is not always accurate on his findings and his theories. However, we can never surely understand what is right or not, since the patient himself/herself is not capable of comprehending oneselves as well.

I think little Hans is a unique case for his age. I do not recall being very curious about the world at his age and connecting certain fears with an object. I think it is very rare that a boy would connect a horse to his parents, even though not completely impossible, since children hardly have any understanding of symbolism. I think little Hans lacks an intimate/sincere relationship with both his parents, and he is a deep thinker. I feel that little Hans was actually afraid of losing his mother's attention rather than being afraid of his father according to the Oedipal conflict.