10 thoughts on “Conferências introdutórias sobre psicanálise 3. Teoria geral das neuroses

  1. says:

    The medulla oblongata is a very serious and lovely object. When I was in college, I used to get in long and rather aimless arguments with a friend about Freud The funny thing is, both of us agreed that Freud was fundamentally wrong about most things The argument was, rather, whether Freud was worth reading and thinking about and was even potentially useful in spite of his theories veracity My friend said he wasn t, and I said he was I still think this way, which is why, every now and the The medulla oblongata is a very serious and lovely object. When I was in college, I used to get in long and rather aimless arguments with a friend about Freud The funny thing is, both of us agreed that Freud was fundamentally wrong about most things The argument was, rather, whether Freud was worth reading and thinking about and was even potentially useful in spite of his theories veracity My friend said he wasn t, and I said he was I still think this way, which is why, every now and then, I find myself making my way through one of his books Probably I should have come to this book sooner Freud s Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis is his attempt to give an accessible introduction to his system, and is thus probably one of the best places to start if you re curious about his work The lectures, given over one academic year, are divided into three sections the parapraxes the Freudian slips , the interpretation of dreams, and the neuroses The material is arranged this way for pedagogical purposes, beginning with the simplest and most easily observable phenomena and ending with genuine mental disorders By necessity, the last section is both the longest and densest One thing that fascinates me about Freud is how a system of ideas with paltry factual support could be so seductive and gripping For my part, I find Freud s system remarkably attractive thinking along his lines has an undeniable emotional appeal, at least in my case In my review of Civilization and its Discontents, I gave a partial explanation of this by likening Freud s system in outline to that of Christianity But I don t think that s the whole story, and thus I want to explore it further While reading this book, it struck me that Freud s system is comparable with the Aristotelian physics and cosmology that held sway for so long in the Western world Both of these systems, Freud s and Aristotle s, take such hold of one s mind because they seem to explain everything while offering very little in the way of falsifiable propositions Aristotelians could throw around terms like matter, form, ideal, potential, perfect, nature, and soul without providing any circumstances in which these concepts could be tested and disproved.These categories were specific enough to be rationally compelling, and yet vague enough to be applied to nearly anything Similarly, Freud created a system that could be applied to history, religion, mythology, and literature, while never specifying how its categories repression, unconscious, transference, libido, censor etc could be disproven It thus gives the illusion of an airtight and exhaustive system while remaining safe from testability The main reason that Freud s theories are untestable is that they rely on interpretation and interpretations, by definition, cannot be falsified Now to be fair I think Freud s system is most plausible, as a therapeutic technique, when he has his patients interpret their own dreams and symptoms If a patient is free associating, it makes sense that they might be able to hit upon an emotionally resonant interpretation Nevertheless, I think it would still be incorrect to call even the patient s interpretation the true one, since being emotionally affected by something now in no way proves that this same thing motivated a dream in the past And this is putting to the side the fact that Freud s explanation of the formation of dreams relies on unobservable processes and entities that he posits in the mind But let me stop here before I get sucked down the rabbit hole To repeat, then, although I think it cannot be proved that any interpretation of a dream is a true one, I still think having patients interpret their dreams might help them to explore their own feelings But when Freud begins enumerating a kind of key for dream interpretation, his system gets really unsupportable According to Freud, certain things always symbolize other things in dreams, irrespective of the individual, their cultural background, or their experiences And, of course, most of these symbols are representations of sexual matters We have earlier referred to landscapes as representing the female genitals Hills and rocks are symbols of the male organ Fruit stands, not for children, but for the breasts Wild animals mean people in an excited sensual state, and further, evil instincts or passions Blossoms or flowers indicate women s genitals, or, in particular, virginity Do not forget that blossoms are actually the genitals of a plant.There is an entire lecture like this and personally I find it so ludicrous that it makes me deeply suspicious of Freud s judgment It relies on so many unsubstantiated premises that dreams have a deeper meaning, that this deeper meaning is always a desire, that this desire is always illicit and sexual, that somehow certain symbols are universal, and that Freud is somehow privy to this information that it boggles the mind trying to unravel it When Freud does offer the explanation for why one thing symbolizes another, it bears a remarkable similarity to the logic used by conspiracy theorists And, speaking of wood, it is hard to understand how that material came to represent what is maternal and female But here comparative philology may come to our help Our German wordHolzseems to come from the same root as the Greek hule , meaning stuff raw material Now there is an island in the Atlantic named Madeira This name was given to it by the Portuguese when they discovered it, because at that time it was covered all over with woods For in the Portuguese languagemadeirameans wood You will notice, however, that madeira is only a slightly modified version of the Latin wordmateria , which oncemeans material in general But material is derived frommater , mother the material out of which anything is made is, as it were, mother to it This ancient view of the thing survives, therefore, in the symbolic use of wood for woman or mother.Clearly this sort of thing wouldn t pass muster in any scientific journal nowadays, and it s hard to see how it could have been convincing in Freud s day either The above is just one example of the un falsifiability inherent in Freud s thought and this is a big part, I think, of why his system can be so seductive But there is another reason for its appeal It is fundamental to Freud s system to question the motivations of its detractors That it, the system has a built in defense mechanism in that anyone who disagrees can be accused of being a repressed individual who can t face the truth of his own illicit desires To take just one example, let s look at Freud s discussion of his famous Freudian slip In these lectures, he claims that all slips of the tongue are caused by a repressed desire that is finding a distorted expression Now to be fair, there are definitely many instances when this seems to be the case, that somebody accidentally said something they were trying to keep secret Nevertheless, it is absurd to claim that all slips of the tongue have this origin For one, you cannot legitimately make a universal generalization from any finite data set You cannot, for example, claim that all apples are delicious after you ve eaten 100 delicious apples Moreover, and once again, finding the deeper meaning of a Freudian slip relies on interpretation, and interpretations can never be objectively determined But atroubling problem for me is that Freud essentially asserts that it is impossible to make an innocent mistake If you are tired and you misspeak, it cannot just be an error, but must be the expression of a deep and terrible desire of which you are not aware And if you deny this, it only proves Freud s point obviously you can t face the truth about yourself, you are too repressed Thus there isn t any way out You can t disprove Freud s interpretation since it s an interpretation and can t be disproven , and all your protestations only make you lookguilty And this sort of double bind isn t restricted to Freud s theories on slips of the tongue, but apply to the interpretation of dreams and neurotic symptoms I wouldn t be surprised if Freud argued that any time somebody fell off a bike it was because of a latent death wish To be fair to Freud, none of these criticisms are unique to his system To the contrary, they can be applied to many, if not all, religious and political ideologies The questioning of other people s motivation is especially destructive in the latter sphere, and can be found on both the Right and the Left The only reason Democrats want to expand social security because they re communists who want to make everyone dependent on the government they want to expand background checks to take away everyone s guns and make them unable to fight against government tyranny Meanwhile, poor whites are too dumb to vote for their own interests, those who disagree with Obama are racists, those with Hillary are sexists, and if you disagree it s your privilege talking Don t misunderstand me I m not saying that these accusations are necessarily incorrect, and indeed I think they are sometimes quite compelling Nevertheless I think you have got to be careful when you question the motivations of your opponent, because it makes it impossible to have a reasonable debate Probably it s best to assume good intentions unless proven otherwise But this brings me pretty far from Freud Or does it I began by saying how useful is Freud even if one disagrees with him, and I think one way he s useful is to illustrate how unsupported ideas can become widely accepted But of course that s not all Freud was, in my opinion, quite obviously brilliant His ideas were so original and his thought process so novel that it is fascinating just to see him at work What s , even if they lack rigor in a scientific setting, Freud s ideas, terminology, and system have undeniably enriched how we think about the human experience That dreams can reveal a deeper meaning, that slips of the tongue can reveal hidden intentions, that desires can be repressed, that traumatic memories can be unconscious, that much of your motivation lies beyond your awareness all this andwe owe to Freud Two weeks ago I was walking through the Thyssen Bornemisza in Madrid, where there is a wonderful painting by Salvador Dal Dream Caused by the Flight of a Bee Around a Pomegranate a Second Before Awakening The painting, which makes no rational sense, was partly inspired by Freud s ideas on the dream logic, how ideas get associated in the unconscious The elements in the painting are associated, not by reason, but by other chains of association the sounds of their names, specific memories, visual properties, sexual desires The entire logic of the painting can thus be said to be Freudian Now, considering this, can you argue that he didn t enrich our culture


  2. says:

    Freud was sometimes wrong and sometimes right but you can not ignore him at any time He has changed the discourse of classical thinking about a certain phenomenon.Introductory psychoanalysis lectures portrait the pretty pictures of his imagination and beliefs with the help of psychological theories He discusses all the things that come in his way.


  3. says:

    What it s like to be a fucking human being is a phrase we know to be DFW s characterization of the kind of fiction he was intent on creating The sentiment has a long tradition of compelling the creation of great books, back through Barth and Pynchon, Joyce and Proust, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, Shakespeare and Rabelais, Homer and Socrates Add to the series the name Freud, who along with Marx and Nietzsche, these three masters of suspicion, turned our attention to an element of being human fro What it s like to be a fucking human being is a phrase we know to be DFW s characterization of the kind of fiction he was intent on creating The sentiment has a long tradition of compelling the creation of great books, back through Barth and Pynchon, Joyce and Proust, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, Shakespeare and Rabelais, Homer and Socrates Add to the series the name Freud, who along with Marx and Nietzsche, these three masters of suspicion, turned our attention to an element of being human from which it was always happier to turn away These three masters of suspicion developed an analysis and criticism which showed that there wasto being human than can be had by the mere assumption of the self s transparency to itself With Marx, the human being is subject to an ideology which functions behind the scenes with Nietzsche, the exercise of Power is discovered even within the attempts of our most altruistic practices and with Freud the Copernican revolution is completed with the discovery of a psychic territory known as the unconscious, that territory which mythology had populated with devils and demons, which Paul found as sin living within me when he finds that that which he desired to do he could not do and that which he despised was that which he did do Freud s Introductory Lectures on Psycho Analysis, a series of public lectures delivered over the course of two academic terms, 1915 16 and 1916 17, in Vienna, shows Freud at his most popularizing, developing the mode of investigation which is psycho analysis, then still a young science, to an audience at once curious and skeptical As such, these lectures are to be highly commended to the curious reader today in so far as we all know already what Freud s up to and why he is long ago discredited, his theories disproven, his thinking mired in Victorian morality and misogyny, his system unscientific, himself excessively obsessed with sexuality, etc etc All of which common places about Freud, all such know betterisms are laid to rest in these lectures as Freud listens to and responds to all the common objections to this work, the same then as now His mode of presentation is dialogic, engaged in a conversation with his audience His thinking hesitates, he feels out the limits of what psycho analysis has accomplished, what is still unknown, where he has had success and how he has failed, in which direction he has had to change his mind, together with the editor s footnotes which connect various passages of the lectures with Freud s other writings, indicating where and when and how Freud s thinking changed and developed, we get the impression of a massive undertaking which cannot exist in any dogmatic framework.These lectures are divided into three sections functioning to bring the audience step wise into the methods of interpretation which is psycho analysis, the discovery of meaning within apparently meaningless activities of the human being First is the discussion of parapraxes, the infamous Freudian slip of the tongue This is followed by a relatively compact discussion of the interpretation of dreams which isfully developed in his famous The Interpretation of Dreams If I may digress on this just a moment, the kernel of this interpretation of dreams is not so much about turning the manifest dream content into a true meaning found in its latent content, what it is really about, but rather to understand the dream work itself, the contortion and displacement of the latent into the manifest content, what it is that is functioning here that disallows the true meaning itself to show itself directly but only in a perverted form which we do experience as dream But enough The third section of the lectures takes us then into psycho analysis proper, the understanding of the neuroses As is the nature of such pedagogical steppings deeper into a given matter, here Freud s thinking and presentation becomedense and subject to greater misunderstanding A discussion of the neuroses is beyond the capacity of this review and indeed of this reviewer Nevertheless, careful reading of this third portion of lectures provides a great deal of insight into Freud s concerns and methodologies Common as Freud s thought is, it is still baffling to me how little of this thinking is actually understood in proportion to the ubiquity of his name upon the western person s tongue He is the subject of too easy jokes, but has written a bit on jokes which should be of interest to anyone who enjoys a good joke at Sigmund s expense, The Joke and Its Relation to the Unconscious Also of interest, I m sure, to the average person desirous of avenging themself upon Freud would be his The Psychopathology of Everyday Life The volume of our present attention should also be paired with the later New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, published in 1933 Discussing resistance to Freud is a slippery proposition There are certainly objections to be made, clarifications to be asked for, some things to be rejected, items which must befully developed, etc, etc But what is most dangerous perhaps, and even disingenuous, as Freud himself would acknowledge, is to treat this resistance as a symptom of a neurosis which can only be resolved by analysis But analysis belongs on the couch, not in public conversation and discussion about a scientific methodology


  4. says:

    Near his life s end he recorded on audio these words I started my professional activity trying to bring relief to my neurotic patients I discovered some important new facts about the unconscious People did not believe in my facts and thought my theories unsavory In the end I succeeded, but the struggle is not yet over.It had its 1st edition in 1920 and the book was aimed at laypeople In its preface, Stanley Hall noticed that Psychoanalysis was not much of a topic for the APA American Near his life s end he recorded on audio these words I started my professional activity trying to bring relief to my neurotic patients I discovered some important new facts about the unconscious People did not believe in my facts and thought my theories unsavory In the end I succeeded, but the struggle is not yet over.It had its 1st edition in 1920 and the book was aimed at laypeople In its preface, Stanley Hall noticed that Psychoanalysis was not much of a topic for the APA American Psychological Association , though in other fields biography, education, literature, history it had gained widespread interest.I would divide the topics approached, in these 28 lectures, in three main areas 1 the psychology of Errors 2 the Dream 3 the Neurosis A slip of the tongue which occurs in Shakespeare s Merchant of Venice, Act III, Scene II, is exceedingly delicate in its poetic motivation and technically brilliant in its handling Goethe said, Where he jokes, there lurks a problem concealed On the first topic, Freud pretending the audience is like the ignorant, neurotic patient approaches with very simple terms some phenomena common to any terrestrial human being slips of tongue, forgetting of names, included , loosing and mislaying objects All these, have a hidden meaning Of special relevance are words themselves and these paradigmatic lines of Freud words were originally magicwith words one can make others blessed or otherwiseIn the unveiling of meaning, Freud warns about projection, and cautions the un familiarized mind first study oneself Three lectures are dedicated to those above mentioned errors.Much is to be dedicated to the Dream topic, 12 lectures to be precise It s a broad, exemplified part, which takes the reader into this ever puzzling area dreams, which are often blurred, senseless, absurd.but some have meaning Psychoanalysis is a good framework for interpretation Like symptoms in the neurotic disease, so dreams have meaning there s the manifest content and the LATENT dream thought You ll always be after the latter Finally, some lectures have been addressed to psychopathology, namely, the General Theory of Neurosis Libido driven explanations of neurosis and technical issues make part of the remaining lectures A good introduction


  5. says:

    After my long agonizing exodus of reading this book 3 volumes translated in my place , I wished one thing strangling Freud s dead body and killing him once again But then, I thought What if my throttling him, it s subconsciously related to one simple sexual act, the fulfilling action of a hand job My fingers wrapped around his neck causing satisfying pressure This means I wanna kill somebody s dick And that is wrong, very wrong Thus, I thought again.Maybe me suffocating him in reality, i After my long agonizing exodus of reading this book 3 volumes translated in my place , I wished one thing strangling Freud s dead body and killing him once again But then, I thought What if my throttling him, it s subconsciously related to one simple sexual act, the fulfilling action of a hand job My fingers wrapped around his neck causing satisfying pressure This means I wanna kill somebody s dick And that is wrong, very wrong Thus, I thought again.Maybe me suffocating him in reality, it s my subconscious relieving its hate and killing intentions toward my mom since she wouldn t let me sleep with my father and nonexistent brother Which is fucking insane lapsus linguae, I really wanted to use the word freaking but I mistook it with fucking cause I was actually thinking about having sex Therefore, I gave it another try Perhaps the act of choking him, it s me wishing to die since this society represses my sexual incestuous urges I m suicidal If the conclusions above are true, I should be locked in a psychiatric hospital Thank you Freud


  6. says:

    One is not advised to just jump into Freud, as I did, taking little account of the order of his publications He revised his theories too often.I was fortunate to read this series of lectures early on, although I would have been evenfortunate to have read his earlier work on hysteria first Here Freud s theory is presented simply in lectures intended for a lay audience and here Freud s theory itself is still relatively simple compared to developments post Beyond the Pleasure Principle.I re One is not advised to just jump into Freud, as I did, taking little account of the order of his publications He revised his theories too often.I was fortunate to read this series of lectures early on, although I would have been evenfortunate to have read his earlier work on hysteria first Here Freud s theory is presented simply in lectures intended for a lay audience and here Freud s theory itself is still relatively simple compared to developments post Beyond the Pleasure Principle.I read this during the height of the Watergate investigations while living at grandmother s Michigan cabin with my brother Fin and a close high school friend Having no television, phonograph or tape player, there was a lot of good reading done that summer


  7. says:

    Freud was a genius That in no way means he was always right But you ignore him at your peril if you are interested in understanding the human condition.


  8. says:

    Let me preface my review of Freud s introductory lectures by appending an excerpt from my review of The Communist Manifesto Having recently read the introductory lectures of Sigmund Freud preceding my reading of The Communist Manifesto, I realize that Marx has most probably suffered the same fate as Freud in the modern age they are both dismissed as radical idealists who expired in the infancy of their sociological psychological breakthroughs This faulty appraisal is reinforced by most people Let me preface my review of Freud s introductory lectures by appending an excerpt from my review of The Communist Manifesto Having recently read the introductory lectures of Sigmund Freud preceding my reading of The Communist Manifesto, I realize that Marx has most probably suffered the same fate as Freud in the modern age they are both dismissed as radical idealists who expired in the infancy of their sociological psychological breakthroughs This faulty appraisal is reinforced by most people s ignorance of what these two thinkers really had to say, or by the extrapolation of their most abrasive phrasing of, much of which is, an otherwise palatable, and now rather commonplace and applied, revelation I realize that along with most people, I know very little about thinkers like Freud and Marx I have mostly known only what people say about them, or crumb quotes from them that float past in the raging current of money bearing, status enhancing information that poisons much of academia That being said I must say that I thoroughly enjoyed reading Freud s lectures Without agreeing with his every word, I must admit that I settled on the opinion that the man was a genius He was also very brave, for he resisted the tide of conventional safe think and dared to offer revolutionary explanations for neuroses For some, Freud underpinned the Darwinian dethronement of humanity as the pinnacle of the created order, and some view his ideas as completely reductionist in a portrayal of man as a mere beast with completely vulgar tendencies Freud would not deny that, like the Copernican revolution, his ideas would lower mankind s opinion of himself as the center of the universe, but what many do not realize is that Freud actually contended with the other forerunners of psychology beginning in the 19th century i.e the structuralists and behaviorists that sought to reduce mankind to a hardwired machine or a salivating dog He also sought to keep in check the exaggerated claims of psychiatry in his day which went so far as to consider neurotics as degenerates whose illnesses were viewed as incoherent malfunctions of the psyche with no experiential significance In a sense, Freud resisted reductionist theories, and attempted to plant his theories an equally safe distance from the extremes of religious fundamentalism, and, on the other hand, scientific materialism.Freud pioneered objective dream interpretation, and I was quite impressed with his deconstruction of dream work As a result of reading his ideas on dreams, I came away with a greater capacity for understanding the development of what Freud calls latent dream thoughts into what becomes the manifest dream Working backwards one can interpret the original thought or wish of the dream by unraveling the effects of second revisions , imagery , displacement , and condensation that distorts the original intent of the dream This is not a na ve exploration of dream mystique, but a serious, analytical dissection of the mental processes that produce dreams Some of the most misunderstood and underappreciated facets of Freudian theory are his ideas on sexuality There are SO many people who don t understand but rashly judge on this issue, so I ll make a few cursory attempts to bring clarification, and debunk some of the objections that might be raised against taking Freud seriously.1 The Oedipus Electra complexes are, along with most of the neuroses, really parental attachment issues in general and not necessarily conscious wishes to always have sex with a parent.2 Idea s such as female penis envy and male fear of castration may have been a cultural symptom of the sway of patriarchal power within society, and thus Freud s analysis of his therapeutic experiences with neurotics may have been heavily influenced by the desire fear of masculinity within society that could open or preclude someone from being accepted or rejected In other words, it might have beendesirable in his day, even in all past history, to become a dominant male How could that not find its way into psychological theories 3 Freud believed that children were polymorphously perverse and mostly unconscious He believed their sexual gratification, especially in the pre phallic stage, would take many different kinds of unconscious, perverse unnatural forms before it discovered pathways that were safe and purposeful in terms of fulfillment In other words, children s desires were going to be all over the place, and only our super ego s censure of immoral thoughts keep us from suspecting that children s sexuality might actually be a bit crooked even in normal development We largely believe children to be asexual, and Freud delights in scoffing at the obvious censoring of unacceptable theories that society deems dangerous.4 Freud speculated, rightly in my mind, that his theories were going to be unpopular with mainstream society because Law would always represent the repression and denial of natural instincts that may upset the peace it has worked so hard to establish Society believes that no greater threat to its civilization could arise than if the sexual instincts were to be liberated and returned to their original aims For this reason society does not wish to be reminded of this precarious portion of its foundations But in the repression not guidance of those instincts, the forceful current remains hidden underground that may one day erupt and swallow all of civilization s finest work in a moment of instinctual upheaval 5 It is well known that Freud opposed religion in almost any form, but what he mostly repelled was any attempt, in science or religion, to craft a Weltanschaunng, or an absolute theory of everything He knew too well that we are mentally prone to try and find an easy answer to salve our loneliness and fear, but we are too easily duped into fixating on a pleasing concept that blinds us to our true condition, and offers us a promise of reward with little work, and little pain Religion, in his mind, is an easy, one stroke solution for a current complexity, and invariably bears the imprint of the times and conditions in which they arose It is copout, an avoidance of real problems and real pain He mentions that religion may be significant in some stages of maturation, but ultimately needs to be outgrown And, for much of the religion that Freud was familiar with, his estimate of religion may not have been far off point There s , muchFreud was brazen in his exploration of the psyche, and lifted up his voice to boldly assert his ideas that he knew would be suppressed by the majority of people that heard him But if there was anything Freud understood, it was that people naturally repress forces and ideas that threaten them to which they have no ready defense Freud had reached into the mind and purposes of mankind and, in the words of W.H Auden, put his finger on the flesh that has been skinned There s nothing to be afraid of here, except the realization that one might be found And Freud did a great job of finding where it is that people are lurking, and what it is they are secretly clutching behind their own consciousness


  9. says:

    I had a goal when I started this book Whenever I mentioned Freud to anyone, including those who had never read him, I seemed to get a pretty common response Oh, you mean the sex obsessed psychologist My goal was to read this book, and then to explain that his sex obsession did not exist, was blown out of proportion, etc However, having finished this book, all I can say is that his critics were right He was sex obsessed However, even though he traces way top many psychological problems I had a goal when I started this book Whenever I mentioned Freud to anyone, including those who had never read him, I seemed to get a pretty common response Oh, you mean the sex obsessed psychologist My goal was to read this book, and then to explain that his sex obsession did not exist, was blown out of proportion, etc However, having finished this book, all I can say is that his critics were right He was sex obsessed However, even though he traces way top many psychological problems and dream symbols back to sex, I think one of his main themes is correct Sex plays a much larger role in human society than most people would like to admit Having said that though, the extreme to which he takes this is ridiculous In dreams, for example, he thinks that everything has a double meaning and of course, that double meaning is sexual According to Freud, everything from flying, to having your teeth pulled, to something as simple as an orange all have a sexual meaning behind them Enough of this though This is most of the book, so if what I have just described sounds really bizarre or silly, you probably should not bother reading this Even with his sex obsession, I still found Freud quite interesting Although many of his views have since been proven to be pseudo scientific and just plain ridiculous, many of his ideas have also continued on to influence psychology So, if you have any interest in the history of psychology, this book is probably quite important Before I finish this review, I have one last note to make on this book It is not really a book, and is actually a script for a series of lectures given by Freud as an introduction to his theories So, in closing, even with how bizarre and crazy this book is much of the time, it is an important work of one of the giants of modern psychology, and should be read for its author s major influence on the future development of psychology


  10. says:

    Male chauvinist Nothing closet about him at all The wonder is that he is still given any credence If ever there was advice to be applied to the teacher , it would be this Physician, heal thyself.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *