Talk:Reaction formation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, which collaborates on Psychology and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

One question.Is revulsion at acts of cruelty a reaction formation against one's desire to be cruel? O can the theory be saved by proposing that the revulsion is a reaction formation only if it is excessive?

There are several other reasons why someone could be revolted by cruelty (or whatever the case may be). Believing that theft is wrong doesn't necessarily mean one secretly desires to be a thief. If someone appears to be overdoing a particular attitude, it might be reaction formation, but it could also be any number of other things. Afalbrig 06:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Examples

While the examples themselves appear to be acceptable, they're not as strongly written as they could be (i.e. saying that one example is speculated, and the other "might be", etc.) --Sigma 7 06:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I think some comlementary non-sexual examples are needed to flesh out understanding of the topic. Or is this simply because I'm oversexed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.110.145.13 (talk) 23:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I hope the Native American narrative that I have added helps balancing the sexual focus. __meco 20:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] American Dad?

Does the example of the American Dad episode seem innacurate and unneccessary to anyone else? This doesn't really seem to be an example of the defense mechanism in question. Arguably, it might be denial, though it really seems to be mere hypocrisy, and not a defense mechanism at all. Deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tutsuro (talk • contribs) 04:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Also the Muskogee bit is corny and not reaaly on tpoic. Couldn't we have some quotes from Freud and more psychoanalytic theory here? A bit more scholarly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.4.204 (talk) 18:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

To me it appears that neither of the two of you have grasped the concept on the reaction formation. It is a difficult concept to grasp for many, and examples both by allegory as the Muskogee section and mentions in popular media should serve well as much needed teaching tools. I added the Muskogee part because when I first read it, I immediately found it to be a wonderfully lucid story in this respect. Why do you insist on "learned"? Isn't the main point here to convey knowledge, even abstruse learning? Sure we can have learned, but that doesn't mean we have to throw out the rest if it's good. __meco (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, it is a little bit of a non sequitur. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.122.20.123 (talk) 05:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)