-Believed religion was psychopathic: the religious experience for him was a sign of mental disability
-Analyzed people from the perspective of what is wrong with them
-Believe that Carl Jung opposed him
-noticed patients who believed in an after-life enjoyed greater psychic function in late life so attributed health to the religious experience
-analyzed people from the perspective of what works very well...asked what is healthy and worked from there since that was the only thing provable.
-Believed that he was the natural evolution and/or co-dependent camp of thought to Adler and Freud
Notable Jungian - many renowned Nobel peace prize winners and creators such as George Lucas.
It seems that these people are also Freudian though in the sense that they are Jungian. A jungian in other words is a freudian + much more where as a freudian is just a Freudian, he does not ascribe to Jung at all.
Seems like Jung is a healthier view based on my opinion and experience. Freud seemed to be warped and projecting a lot of his own issues on to the matter. For example his notion of the id is inferior to Jung's notion of the unconscious in that Jung acknowledge several different forces of the unconscious where as Freud's id was a jarbled slew that averaged out to one force.