I tried talking about this on the MBTI threads but no one really was interested, so im making a thread for it.
This is a thread for talking about Fruedian, Jungian or any other type of psychoanalysis in general. Some odd discussion about the Psychological Types and the functions is also ok if it ties into something else related to psychoanalysis, but if you specifically want to talk about that, then go to the MBTI threads.
I'll start out with a story about a discussion Freud and Jung had.
Other urls found in this thread:
As many of you probably already know, Jung and Freud used to be friends, though after a while their friendship fell apart.
One of the things that made their friendship fall apart was that Freud thought Jung had an Oedipal complex towards him, and part of what made him think that was that Jung literally asked if their friendship could be enjoyed as "Father and son instead of equals", being fully aware that he was asking this from the man who came up with the theory of of the Oedipal complex at all.
So there is this interesting dispute between them about a dream Jung had. I'll post it in the next post because it doesnt fit into this one
>The dream was one of Jung's. He dreamt that he was on the top floor of an old house, well furnished and with fine paintings on the walls. He marvelled that this should be his house and commented "Not bad!" But then it occurred to him that he had no idea what the lower floor was like, so he went down to see. There everything was much older. The furnishings were medieval and everything was rather dark. He thought, "Now I really must explore the whole house." He looked closely at the floor. It was made of stone slabs, and in one of these he discovered a ring. When he pulled it, the slab lifted, and he saw some narrow stone steps leading down into the depths. He went down and entered a low cave cut out of the rock. Bones and broken pottery were scattered about in the dust, the remains of a primitive culture, and he found two human skulls, obviously very old and half-disintegrated. Then he awoke.
>All that interested Freud about this dream was the possible identity of the skulls. He wanted Jung to say who they belonged to, for it seemed evident to him that Jung must harbor a death-wish against their owners. Jung felt this was completely beside the point, but, as was habitual with him at that stage of the relationship, he kept his doubts to himself. To Jung, the house was an image of the psyche. The room on the upper floor represented his conscious personality. The ground floor stood for the first level of the unconscious, which he was to call the personal unconscious, while in the deepest level of all he reached the collective unconscious. [_] To him, the skulls had nothing to do with death-wishes. They belonged to our human ancestors, who helped shape the common psychic heritage of us all.4
So basically Jung thought that the dream represented the human psyche in general and did not have anything to do with any specific real life occurences.
Freud on the other hand, and i assume as its not explicitly stated, thought the house in the dream represented his Psychoanalytical Theory, and perhaps even their relationship as a whole. While Jung liked certain aspects of it, the deeper he went into it the more he found things he disliked, and even resented. Freud probably thought the thing he resented the most about it was Freud himself. Jung liked Freuds theory, but the closer you got to the center of the theory, so the more you found Freuds own personal influences, the more Jung resented it all. He secretly resented Freud, and in my opinion Freud perfectly pinned this down.
I also think that Jung on some level at least knew what was going on, but was in denial
So my question to you guys is, who do you think was right? I think that both were right desu. The house did represent the human psyche, but it also represented Jungs own specific human psyche, and specifically how Jung felt about Freuds pyschoanalytical theory, and even Freud himself
Chad Jung was absolutely based and virgin Freud couldn't help but try to slap his theories on all occurrences. The house being the human psyche makes absolute sense, there is no reason at all for resentment to be in there.
I cant seem to analyze my emotions. It seems like i've hit the wall.
Well start with knowing them then. What exactly are these emotions? You cant analyze something if you dont even know what it is
You fail to understand your audience. Modern Jow Forums is a festering shitpile dedicated to circle-jerking and self-loathing. The board's culture shuns actual critical thought as it may require its users to think critically about their own situation. I would be delighted for actual conversation to take place here but you are more likely to get a few posts of self-pitying and then a 404.
Everything seems so mixed up like tangled ball. I have no idea what i want or who am i. It feels like i'm emotional stuck at 11-12.
You cant do much with that information man. You first have to figure out what it exactly is that is making you feel that way
/Psychoanal
Don't need to read more
Yeah, you are right. I just dont know where else to go than r9k. /b/ is even worse and all the other boards have topics and their own circlejerks. Other chans are dead, forums are dead, the only other optiom is reddit and discord and the problem with all last three is identities, which is not something i really like.
R9k is the only anonymous, general discussion forum on the internet that is not dead. Its kind of a crazy though when you think about it that.
Even when you remove the anonymous factor, you still wont find many if any other places on the internet that are the same and dont have a circlejerk.
I fucking feel you man, it's why I'm still coming here all these years later even when it's objectively hot shit. Glad some people like you are still kicking.
To answer your question:
>who do you think was right?
Neither. I think dream interpretation is a shitty platform for people to project their own desires. In the context of Jung's dream, his own analysis of it will be more accurate on a personal level, as he likely knew himself better than Freud. Especially if him and Freud had been drifting apart. Some of Freud's theories still have some merit, and as a historical influence on psychology his work is incredibly important, but his opinion in this matter was largely him preaching his views. Nothing more, nothing less.
>You first have to figure out what it exactly is that is making you feel that way
What makes me feel that im stuck? I still live with parents (26 khv neet), have no future plans, nothing interests me and i'm not interested in dating/sex and etc.
Where can I find a Reichian therapist?
I want someone to put pressure on my body during psychotherapy as it will help me calm down.
Are you seriously self-pitying and derailing a thread with a legitimate topic to whine about being a KHV NEET when the entire rest of the board is dedicated to that? How about replying to the OP instead of begging for validation?
>derailing a thread
what?
It either represented Jung's own theory about what the human psyche is or his own personal mental problems.
Did you even read his posts or did you just see /psychoanalysis/ and assume that it was an armchair psychology thread? I could be entirely wrong but I assumed that OP's direct question about Freud's and Jung's theories did not imply that he wanted to diagnose NEETs
I really do miss the forums and all the autistic discussions and the Nazi shit mods loves to pull.
Even though Jung is based and Freud is a huge retard, psychoanalysis is just defanged occultism.
technically psychoanalysis is just a guess.
>his own personal mental problems.
Thats what Freuds perspective was. Remember for a great deal of Jungs life he lived together with Freud basically, they spent most of their time together. Freud thought, in my opinion rightfully, that Jung although openly admired his work, secretly also resented Freud for a lot of theories which assume the worst in people. I do think Jung was right when it comes to the human psyche in general, Freud had way too negative of a view of it, so we can say that Jung rightfully resented him. But i do think that Jung although liking him, secretly also harbored resentment against him for those reasons, and Freud picked up on that.
>defanged occultism
>defanged
What did you mean with that?
>Glad some people like you are still kicking.
Same to you friend.
I miss the old internet in general. The activity was more distributed across all of the internet. You had a bit of everything, there was just so much more variation and different types sites and subcultures. Now everything is centralized into a handful of active sites with a few very large cultures and outside of that little to nothing. Also the political warfare of the elections finished off anything that was not already swallowed by the mass culture. That was the final blow. Now we have zoomer internet. I think this is internet 3.0, or 4.0 if you see the Era from 2010 to 2017 as a separate era.
By sticking to closely to scientific ideas and the physical world, psychoanalysis isn't really able to give you the same level of insight that the same sort of exploration in an occult context will give you.
You're also much less likely to fall off the rails and go crazy though, hence why I chose the word defanged.
Yeah i ment this as a general discussion on psychoanalysis, not as a place where i psychoanalyze people. Though i wouldnt mind helping people a little, but if its just gonna be people whining about being NEETs like 90% of the rest of the threads on this board then yeah thats not the intention here lol.
>people whining about being NEETs
they whine about no gf
Unconscious is bullshit.Being sad is irrational
Its already proven man
Accurate analysis desu. But i think Jungs theories fall exactly between that area of just pure, almost insane, occultism and scientific thought. Though i personally question if that was intentional or accidental.
That's what I really like about Jung, he really straddles some difficult lines without looking like a total nutcase, and bridges some very difficult gaps in the process.
esotheric bullshit that has nothing to do with real science. for fucks sake, freud was called on his bullshit even in jungian times. dislexy is a desire of a child to draw feces with his penis on his mothers body. he LITERALLY SAID THIS.
All I really wanna do is cum inside rainbow dash.
I wanna cum inside barny
I just want to drench them both in my cum untill they're lost in the quivering mass untill they drown
I mean he could be wrong on some things while getting the general idea right, lol.
Haven't heard the dickshit thing before, but I have heard about the whole Oedipal complex thing along with the fact that his theories generally aren't really used scientifically anymore. Definitely said some odd shit
That being said, I hear they're still referenced fairly often, but in more of a theoretical/non-serious context. Like, "oh yeah, kibda like Freud..."
anyway
Do you anons have any thoughts on the madonna-whore complex?
Though to be honest with you im not sure if he was a complete "occult nutcase" as you might have called it, yet intentionally toned it down and only talked about that which could be accepted through a scientific perspective, or if he just happened to naturally fall right in that gap. Im not necessarily saying he just dressed up his theories with a scientific veil (though imo he did quite a bit of that as well), but that he had more to talk about, but only talked about that which is valid by science, and perhaps even that he adopted a more scientific perspective towards his own thoughts, applying self scrutiny to make sure his ideas are valid(though im not sure on this last one).
I have a feeling a lot of it was him intentionally straddling that line so he wouldnt be declared insane.
>Do you anons have any thoughts on the madonna-whore complex?
100% true. You can see it in many people on this board for example.
Likely caused by seeing daddy treat mommy like shit
The whole thing about dreams isnt too strange I think. If you take dreams as normal events, instead of as chaotic occurences, you would at least expect some sort of causal or purposive relationship to exist. Theories are ofcourse always abstractions from reality, Jungs and Freuds are no exception to this, but they might be partly true, or explanatory useful.
Is it a good idea to analyze yourself and if yes what is some good literature to start on?
I like to think the Oedipus stuff isn't true but as time passes, it's looking more and more accurate for my life. I have incest fantasies and also a deep hatred of my father. It's been like this ever since I can remember; he was an alcoholic, mom was nice and protected me. Then as I got older I struck him down and now he's living in a nursing home with mild dementia and I'm here with mom, a NEET in a covert incest scenario. No sexual vibes but extreme codependency and less of a parent/child relationship and more of a friend/friend. I don't know much about psychoanalysis besides the gist you get in beginning psychology courses. But the death drive seems pretty acccurate too; I've been suicidal since I was 11 and live in a state of self-destruction while also projecting (or is it sublimating?) the death energy into my hatred for other people. Dreams also seem to have more meaning than purely random movies being pieced together yet they aren't nearly as meaningful as Jung and Freud make them.
It depends on the person. I would like to say that if you are able to correctly analyze yourself you are probably mentally healthy enough to not need it. And i think that in general, that is true. Some people will misinterpet it all, like literally not understand it and assume it means something completely different than what it really means, and/or project all their own ideas and assumptions on it, and then they might make things worse for themselves.
But for most people, you could give it a try. Just make sure you have mental clarity and are at least somewhat mentally healthy. If you're an nutjob it will only make things worse.
You may want to look into this youtu.be
An interesting take on how the two guys differed. What has bugged me is how do you make psychoanalysis practical? Knowledge isn't entirely power and just because you know what's wrong doesn't inherently fix it, if I'm explaining that right. If to defeat the witch and leave the castle, I need to find positive femininity, what the hell does that look like? Do I just walk outside and talk to girls until someone rescues me from my mom? Or is it the opposite? Do I rescue a sleeping beauty, in turn rescuing myself from my mom? I think I've become a NEET mostly out of laziness but part of me thinks my self-destruction is blinding like Oedipus. Guilt for hating my dad, guilt for my weird fantasies. The solution is to rescue my dad, find a positive feminine force, and that's great and all but very unrealistic. Thanks for the link user, it really got my almonds activated.
Well basically the journey of the hero is leaving behind the safety and stability of order to head out into chaos and to slay the dragon. After slaying the dragon the hero earns the treasure the dragon is guarding, and takes it with him, back to the order that he left behind. This order traditionally and generally refers to the tribe, so the hero is the one who slays the dragon and then enriches the tribe with the treasure gathered by doing so.
The problem of NEETs and people like you seems to be that you cant leave behind the safety of order, and thus become consumed by it. This is what sleeping with the mother symbolizes. Someone who is so dependant on the order and safety that a mother provides to her child that he eventually "sleep" with that order, he falls in love with order and becomes obsessed with it, and also develops a deathly fear of chaos and the unkown. The problem with this is obviously although order brings safety and structure, it also brings rigidity and restriction. So someone who lives his whole life in that order will never really grow because the rigid structure of order simply doesnt allow it. This is how people become manchildren. It logically follows then that the solution to this problem is to introduce more chaos into ones life in the form of positive change
And this is done in the form embodying the hero myth. You have to go out and slay the dragon, which are the problems in your life, that is guarding the treasure, which is that which you NEED (and not necessarily want) to fix your life and even the lives of those around you (the tribe).
What that latter is though, i have no idea. That requires a lot of meta awareness of your life, introspection and critical thought on your part.
Hmm. I knew a bit about the hero journey thing but never connected it to the manchild in me. In regards to treasure, what does that look like? Is it taking home a $50,000 salary to a wife and 2.5 kids in a suburban home? Is it plundering Jewish vaults? Robbing people? I don't want to shit the thread up with me, sorry. I'm just trying to grasp the idea practically.
The dragon is clearcut, it's the chaos of leaving home and entering the world of responsibility. The treasure is really vague and returning with the treasure is even more. Whatever the treasure is, does returning back home, or to the tribe or community, just bring about the same order I escape from? If I'm supposed to get a job, get a wife, make children, build my community with volunteering/donation, etc does that not create the same stability I want to leave? If this is a fight between order and chaos does this make me the harbinger of order, or an emissary rather? Meaning that I'm inherently on the side of order but to grow I must leave it, fight chaos, and come back to share the wealth. Then there must be people who are emissaries of chaos right? They come to the world of order to take wealth and return to their world of shadows. This is all assuming that order is good and chaos is bad but I don't know how else you could frame it. Chaos is an unfortunate necessity and order is our attempt to control it.
Sorry if I'm retarded, user. What I'm trying to say is, if I'm a hero, representing Order, that implies there are villains who represent chaos and they journey into our world the same way we journey into theirs. This is very similar to good and evil and it's really hard not to see it as purely relative. It boils down to kin selection and wanting to protect my tribe, my people, at the expense of others, which I'm fine with, but it also necessitates potentially chaotic, or evil, actions on my part. This doesn't seem in line with what Jordan Peterson wants from people.