Freud: Insane Cokehead or Genius who happened to use cocaine?

[Hells Bells]

Let's talk about Freud.

[Garbarsardar]

I think you have to re-post it to give some meaning to this thread, and I will delete this one and the previous from you...

Blame the server....

[Ummon]

In any case, psychological genius (with many faults), but a terrible doctor.

His vision of the functioning of the mind, is 100 years ahead of time. His foray into pharmacology with cocaine, a successful attempt to poison people.

[Farnan]

Ummon: Do you belive in the existance of an Oepediac/Electra Complex? If so do you believe this plays a major part in a person's developement?

[Ummon]

I do not believe, I have vast experience of it in cilinical context, and no, it is not always present. In western society, though, it is a very important factor.

But I am myself heretical, being a Jungian, thus you will notice, that though admiring Freud for his undoubtable merits, I do not put his constructs in the realm of unmodifiable concepts.

You will consider though that Oedypus complex, is far from being the most important discovery of Freud.

[Farnan]

Carl Jungian was one of his disciples, right?

I'm asking questions so I learn more about it. I'm thinking of going into Psychology (clinical), after break going to switch my major to it. I'd just like to know more about Freud and his theories and how much influence they still have in the psychology world.

[Ummon]

Jung. Jung was the disciple who said: dear Freud, I have my own discoveries to make.

[Farnan]

I though I had it wrong, but Carl was right, right? Is he the one that believed in a collective memory?

[Ummon]

Collective unconscious. The name is correct yes.

Now, my suggestion is this. If you want to study modern psychology, go with cognitivism and neuroscience, but read of psychonalysis in your free time. In the end, you will find interesting coherences between the two.

[Garbarsardar]

I though I had it wrong, but Carl was right, right? Is he the one that believed in a collective memory?

Apparently he was right in many things.

Not only he predicted WW1 (he had this "visions" thing) but he was also less than sympathetic for the soon to be victims of WW2.

Jung was editor of the Zentralblatt für Psychotherapie, a publication that eventually endorsed Mein Kampf as required reading for all psychoanalysts. Not strange:

"The Jew, who is something of a nomad, has never yet created a cultural form of his own and as far as we can see never will, since all his instincts and talents require a more or less civilized nation to act as host for their development" (Collected Works, v. 10, 165-166)

Anyway, no Jungian theory is verifiable or even testable with any scientific method.

And although one should credit Freud for the importance he gave in child development and the studies his work generated the same cannot be said for Jung with his mix of mysticism and parapsychology.

May they both rest in peace, they are a footnote in the history of ideas of this century.

[Ummon]

That is, I'm afraid, a biased interpretation of his behaviour. Jung, essentially, tried to avert the closure of the German association under his control, to avoid the destruction of Analytic Psychology in the whole Nazi area.

Jung had many ideas which today wouldn't stand to a PC examination, but these were the ideas of his time. In any case, he was no anti-semitist, as he was portrayed for political reasons: many of his collaborators were Jews, and also, he clearly foresaw, in many of his works, the coming of WWII and Nazi barbarism.

Sadly, he had Nazi disciples as well (because of the dominant esoterical interest of nazism). Very unfortunate, and cause of an amount of guilt because of compromise, too. But you see, nobody is perfect, not even intelligent people.

As to Jung's theory not existing, this may be considered in part true. On the other hand, this is because his approach was not systematic (after he left a directly experimental approach on verbal associations, skin conductivity, etc). He in a sense produced a sort of vocabulary of the unconscious, one which is particularly helpful as well. Besides, to understand Jung, I had to read all his books. Before reaching the 80% of his work, making sense in his concepts, is indeed more difficult.

As to footnotes, I fear, that you escape into accusing members of other schools/systems of being irrelevant to the developement of the field. Based on biased an politically oriented criticism, as well.

Ultimately, I suspect if anything, this approach is the only footnote in the developement of a discipline. Often mediocrity is justified by constructing closed systems of thought. Personally, I enjoy great cognitivists, great pragmatists, and great psychoanalysts with an open mind, and I assure you, there is plenty of experimental confirmation for Freud, and even more so, for Jung.

But this is an argument, that aside a few quotes on validation of psychoanalysis, I won't tackle here. Also Garb I must thank you, because it was your vicious attack to the experimental bases of psychoanalysis a few years ago, on another board, which brought me to my current experimental interests.

[Siblesz]

I'll have to agree with Ummon on this one. Although Jung's arguments are not purely scientific, sometimes great men need to take a leap of faith from definite evidence to possible evidence in order to make momentous breakthroughs in human knowledge. The concept of the collective unconscious, for example, was the first pyschological theory that attempted to explain the origins of human spirituality, and the connection of all life forms on Earth through a collective mind. After deeply researching the subject, I find that Jung's assessments are proven right time and again. Of course, he was not the first to come up with the concept, but he is the first who attempts to explain it through pyschology. And just for that, he deserves not a footnote, but a chapter in the history of man.

[Ummon]

And to go on a more practical side of the problem, two words:

Sand Therapy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_tray_therapy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandplay_Therapy