Just one further footnote. Freud's psychology should be embraced by religious fundamentalism in many of its forms, when it wishes to speak of the "utter depravity of mankind". Adler's psychology is full of hope with the notion that behaviour in a right direction can be both learned and taught. I do not recall any comments by Adler that evauate whether mankind should be viewed as good or bad. He remains faithful to what Sophia shared with you ... Adler watches the movement. That which is toward mankind is beneficial and to be encouraged. That which drawns down the human potential is useless and to be discouraged. In this regard Adler seems to be a better "scientist" looking at evidence and attempting to draw only supportable conclusions. Thus his psychology although very difficult to learn, seems more sensible and rational than the untestable notions of "Id", "Ego" and "Super Ego". I think I shall just continue discussing a bit more of the basics of his psychology and stay away from the netherland of my poor understanding of Freud's construction. That is going to bring a better benefit in this posting and I really wish I had not done the posting about morallity but I shall leave it in place to show what happens when I lose focus on the more important task. I shall leave "compare and contrast" to the scholars in future!

__________________
George Neeson M.D.