This question immediately raises the problem, "how are we to determine which parts of Freudian theory are 'good'?" Freud may well have argued that the evidence he documented from his psychotherapy sessions was sufficient, whilst behaviourists would demand that the various aspects of a theory could only be recognised as 'good' after being exposed to the full rigours of the scientific method. I personally don't feel that one can hope to design a repeatable experiment …showed first 75 words of 2363 total…

…showed last 75 words of 2363 total…to toilet-training and the anal-stamp, Kline's experiment does appear to be showing something significant, which despite Eysenck and Wilson's derision, cannot easily be explained. In view of the failure of Kline and others to show consistent and satisfactory evidence of a link between personality and anal fixation, I feel that the term 'anal' is a potentially misleading misnomer for a recognised personality type. A more descriptive term, such as 'authoritarian' would be of more value.