|
mikeyboy
Stranger
Registered: 03/13/05
Posts: 1,152
Loc: UK
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
|
Sigmund Freud
#5013556 - 12/04/05 11:40 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Sigmund Freuds work and theories about Dreams and the ID, Ego and Superego - are they the main theories believed in or are there lots?
I'm intrigued and want to read more, any links?
-------------------- LSD: Defrag for the brain
|
crunchytoast
oppositional
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 1,133
Loc: aporia
Last seen: 17 years, 1 day
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: mikeyboy]
#5013607 - 12/04/05 11:54 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sigmund Freuds work and theories about Dreams and the ID, Ego and Superego - are they the main theories believed in or are there lots?
I'm intrigued and want to read more, any links?
sigmund freud founded psychoanalysis, which is a kind of therapy, based on his theories of mental illness.
there are numerous competing approaches to therapy, and numerous competing theories of mental illness.
contemporary theories/approaches to mental illness tend to fall into one of the following groupings:
cognitive-behavioral theories biological theories (espcially psychiatry) humanistic/existential theories psychodynamic theories (including freud) sociocultural theories
(i think i remembered that right.)
individual practitioners may use combinations of different approaches/outlooks in their treatments.
not every approach will necessarily fall those categories.
i suggest an introduction to clinical psychology college textbook. you'd probably be able to find one at a college library.
-------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: mikeyboy]
#5013759 - 12/04/05 12:37 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
mikeyboy said: Sigmund Freuds work and theories about Dreams and the ID, Ego and Superego - are they the main theories believed in or are there lots?
I'm intrigued and want to read more, any links?
From my personal experience, any aspect of Freud's work that has been presented to me was of no real value, and that I have the subsequent conclusion that his work is resultant of an analysis of his own misprogrammed mind, not the actual mechanics by which the mind itself operates.
I pretty much disregard Freud and his concepts, to be blunt.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
I think he was an amazing pioneer of the human psyche. He missed the boat in many areas but he was definately an explorer of the unconsciousness/subconsciousness. We owe a lot to him, as fucked up as he was.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: Icelander]
#5013916 - 12/04/05 01:19 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
We owe a lot to everyone for playing out the roles that they do in order to create this moment as it is. I have found plenty of archetypes that have lived and currently do live which exist in a state of more pure awareness and I feel that they have much to offer us. Everything definitely does exist in its own right, but I tend to recognize models by which I can more effectively become more aware and understanding.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
|
|
i think frued had some good insights, for example "what is consciouss can change but what is unconsciouss doesn't change" but i agree that overall he missed the boat. he also had some really crazy ideas that just make no sense to me.
Edited by Deviate (12/04/05 01:23 PM)
|
it stars saddam
Satan
Registered: 05/19/05
Posts: 15,571
Loc: Spahn Ranch
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: mikeyboy]
#5013936 - 12/04/05 01:25 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I personally feel that people are too quick to write off Freud's theories.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
|
Quote:
itstarssaddam said: I personally feel that people are too quick to write off Freud's theories.
--------------------
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
|
|
Quote:
itstarssaddam said: I personally feel that people are too quick to write off Freud's theories.
i agree, i read a lot of freud this semester and as i said, i think he had some good insights. it seems to me that people take some of the more ridiculous things he said and use them to discredit all of his theories.
|
Prometheus_9
Stranger
Registered: 12/01/05
Posts: 26
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: Deviate]
#5015976 - 12/04/05 10:54 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
A lot of academics writing *about* Freud have made his theories sound more unusual than they were. This is because they have tried to make them simple. The 'psychosexual stages of development', for example, are presented as organic and dimensional in Freud's writings, yet in journals are made to be discrete.
In general, people *like* to believe Freud's ideas have no value. They present a view of humanity, which, according to the Christian mindset, is negative. In my view, it can open up a world of potential and allow us to take control of our lives, though I am not strictly a Freudian.
What's more, academic psychology seems to dislike Freud. In psychology lectures, I find, he is put down whenever the opportunity arises to do so. The extent to which people have tried to discredit him must arouse some suspicion.
|
crunchytoast
oppositional
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 1,133
Loc: aporia
Last seen: 17 years, 1 day
|
|
Quote:
The extent to which people have tried to discredit him must arouse some suspicion.
i don't buy that argument. many psychoanalysts try to discredit cognitive-behavioral theories. it's due to the nature of academia, not the theories themselves.
-------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
|
Prometheus_9
Stranger
Registered: 12/01/05
Posts: 26
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
|
"it's due to the nature of academia, not the theories themselves"
As someone with a background in sociology, I don't think those two can quite be separated. Then add the arguments about the nature of academia helping to give society it's present structure, etc. etc. Then stuff about society being evil, etc. etc.
Oh where has my enthusiasm for debate gone?
|
dblaney
Human Being
Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 7,894
Loc: Here & Now
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: mikeyboy]
#5016602 - 12/05/05 04:53 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Freud definitely had some pertinent insights into the human psyche. Likewise, he also spouted out some total nonsense. Without him, psychoanalysis and psychology would surely not be the same as it is today. I think he made some valuable contributions to psychology that we shouldn't overlook, such as his ideas for the ego/id/superego and the conscious/unconscious. Keep in mind also that his theories are over a hundred years old, and we have advanced significantly since then.
Integral Psychology is where it's at
-------------------- "What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?" "Belief is a beautiful armor But makes for the heaviest sword" - John Mayer Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin. "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln
|
crunchytoast
oppositional
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 1,133
Loc: aporia
Last seen: 17 years, 1 day
|
|
Quote:
As someone with a background in sociology, I don't think those two can quite be separated. Then add the arguments about the nature of academia helping to give society it's present structure, etc. etc. Then stuff about society being evil, etc. etc.
your argument is that the way people try to discredit freud should arouse suspicion.
yet frequent attempts to discredit is no ground for suspicion. academics are very competitive and take any chance they can to attack competing theories, and that's the reason, not some necessary inherent truth in freud's theories.
the notion that academics and their theories are inextricably linked doesn't address the problem with the argument at all. perhaps they are linked, but not in a way that's relevant to the argument. you can examine a theory, find some way of testing it, and determine its truth. this is possible if you're an academic or not. it's due to the nature of science.
so suspicion directed toward a theory has nothing to do with its truth. academics are suspicious toward each competing theory, even toward false theories. the only way your argument would be valid is if it were true that every theory academics are suspicious about is likely true. yet since so many competing theories are inconsistent with each other, it's false that each suspicion-prone theory is probably true; in fact, most of these theories are probably false.
consider the five different groupings of schools of mental illness. since they tend to be mutually exclusive, only one at most could be totally true, and possibly none of them are.
-------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
Edited by crunchytoast (12/05/05 09:16 AM)
|
Veritas
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: mikeyboy]
#5018449 - 12/05/05 03:34 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
|
nakors_junk_bag
Lobster Bisque
Registered: 11/23/04
Posts: 2,415
Loc: ethereality
Last seen: 15 years, 11 months
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: Veritas]
#5018491 - 12/05/05 03:41 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
frued was a fool and a wizard. he understnading of the prominence of sex in the mind was certainly genius. he just went a little too far i think with some of his theories.
-------------------- Asshole
|
Prometheus_9
Stranger
Registered: 12/01/05
Posts: 26
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
|
What I was saying was not supposed to support the idea that there is an 'inherent truth' in his theories - only that they cannot be as completely flawwed as the modern intelligensia would have us believe, and that, by extension, we should ask why they have made so many attacks on him. To subscribe to your way of thinking, (different schools trying to discredit each other) perhaps we should ask why so many prefer to believe that the human brain is just like a computer (as in cognitivism)?
Edited by Prometheus_9 (12/05/05 09:48 PM)
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder
Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
|
Re: Sigmund Freud [Re: mikeyboy]
#5020326 - 12/05/05 09:53 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
There are still some classical Freudian analysts in the world - quite a few in fact. When a psychiatrist and I were rejected from the Inter-regional Society of Jungian Analysts in '91, she went off to become a Freudian. Most are Neo-Freudians today, but there are many people whose psychologies are constellated around the anal-genital chakra motivations, and Freudian theory is completely appropriate to where those people are 'coming from.'
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
crunchytoast
oppositional
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 1,133
Loc: aporia
Last seen: 17 years, 1 day
|
|
Quote:
they cannot be as completely flawwed as the modern intelligensia would have us believe, and that, by extension, we should ask why they have made so many attacks on him.
ah, i thought you were posting the other way round- that the existence of the attacks themselves constitute evidence for flaws in the attacks. but apparently that's not what you had in mind.
Quote:
To subscribe to your way of thinking, (different schools trying to discredit each other) perhaps we should ask why so many prefer to believe that the human brain is just like a computer (as in cognitivism)?
that's an interesting remark, and i'm not sure what you mean by that. i think that's a great question to wonder why people consider the brain to be analogous to a computer, despite the mounds and mounds of evidence against this absurd conception (for example, the insolubility of the symbol-grounding problem).
-------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
|
Vvellum
Stranger
Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
|
|
what are your thoughts on Freud?
|
|