Psychoanalysis

What insight can psychoanalytic theory offer the layman?

What (primary and/or secondary) texts would you recommend as an introduction?

Apart from pic related who are some other notable thinkers in the field?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Lacan shouldn't be considered a psychoanalyst. He just later interpreted Freud.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The Fifty-Minute Hour By Robert Lindner - fun cases that give you a taste of analysis

    Schopenhauer's Porcupines by Deborah Luepnitz - same as above

    Freud and Beyond: A History of Modern Psychoanalytic Thought - good single volume introduction

    Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy: A Practitioner's Guide by Nancy McWilliams - a readable introduction to psychodynamic concepts and thinking.

    Freud and Man's Soul by Bruno Bettelheim - discusses the origins and how it’s personally relevant

    As for Freud

    Studies on Hysteria (Basic Books Classics)
    By Joseph Breuer, Sigmund Freud - single case snippets from his earlier works

    The Interpretation of Dreams

    If you can find it, The Freud Reader edited by Peter Gay - it’s long but skip to Parts 2 & 3 for his theory on the psyche and part 4 for politics and religion

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    you are a very ill man

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >What insight can psychoanalytic theory offer the layman?
    It's bs said that is no different what different religions theorize about the psyche.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Collected Works of Jung, utterly indispensable for understanding the groundwork of modern psychoanalysis (typologies and their applications across history and cultures especially).

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Peanut brain: Jung good. Freud bad. Lacan bad.

    Small brain: Jung good. Freud good. Lacan bad.

    Average brain: Jung good. Freud good. Lacan good.

    Large brain: Jung bad. Freud good. Lacan bad.

    Expanding brain: Jung good. Freud bad. Lacan good.

    Giant brain: Jung bad. Freud good. Lacan good.

    GALAXY BRAIN: Jung bad. Freud bad. Lacan bad.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Can you summarize me a Lacan pleZe. Is he just more elaborate Freud?

      From what I see, Jung and freud are like the two opposites. Aesthetics vs utilitarianism.

      So from your "arrangement" it's clear to see your choice on the matter.

      But to say that none of them are correct is pointless because it's true and false at the same time. By the ironic nature of reality, first should be the same as the last.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Lacan is difficult to summarize because his corpus is large and his focus and positions change over time. If I had to be very glib, I would say he's trying to offer a critique of ego psychology that uses structuralist ideas and claiming that doing so gives us a better picture of what Freudian theory and practice are really about.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Jung and Freud aren't opposites. Jung eclipses Freud entirely; Freud's theories are lesser developed and more juvenile. Freud and Adler are opposed ideologically, though Jung mostly reconciles the two while giving preference to Freud's bases in analysis and imagery.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          If you're a Jungian, then you think his work is an expansion on Freud that obviates the latter. If you're a Freudian, then you think the "expansions" Jungians make aren't well-founded, or perhaps more precisely that having a reductive rather than an expansive view of sexuality is what makes analysis useful and compelling.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >having a reductive rather than an expansive view of sexuality is what makes analysis useful and compelling.
            One would only think this if one were completely caught up in projections about sex.
            Also, Jung's point that total free association of dream imagery is unfounded stands as scrutiny against Freud's personalizing methodology. There is obviously too much cross-cultural similarity between conscious and unconscious projections to say that any one symbol could represent anything and anything to any individual.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, I completely agree and this is exactly what I've meant by the opposite.

          Freud is utilitarian Because his ideas are juvenile and incomplete, this is what in part I see as the definition of "utilitarianism". There is no need for development or "completeness" if your theories work with the bare minimum that you manage to discover, or rather arranged, since with such dominant factor as sex (as some anons had proven here ), in contrary, it be hard to find anything that isn't related to it than is, which is exactly what Jung ventured to do and had made himself so distinguished by.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I am a layman. Here are some insights that it offered me:

    - I’m desperate to live the life my mother wanted because she basically made me as a tiny replacement for herself. I need to ignore the goals she placed on me and pursue the goals I actually care about. This included the political views and activist causes that I once thought I cared about. I was actually just using these things to fuel my OCD.
    - I’m afraid that I once loved my father (who molested me at a young age). Maybe I even still love him in some way. I’m afraid of this because it would disappoint and disgust my mother if I ever forgave him. So I push men away and demonize them, and I am extremely slow to forgive anyone.
    - I hate my mother for using me as a better version of herself and as a weapon against my father. I have now started to slowly cut her out of my life, and my life got much, much better.
    - This isn’t really an insight, but I literally stopped being a femcel. I went from being physically unable to have sex due to horrible pain (that had no medical explanation) to just…suddenly being fine with it and having sex for the first time with no issues. This wasn’t directly related to any epiphany. It just happened for seemingly some subconscious reason.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      How long did it take you to know that you were molested?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I was 16 and my father had just left the house and remarried. It’s weird, because I later remembered having conversations with my mother about it when it initially happened. But during those conversations, I denied everything and didn’t take it seriously. These things definitely take a while.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I’m desperate to live the life my mother wanted because she basically made me as a tiny replacement for herself. I need to ignore the goals she placed on me and pursue the goals I actually care about.

      Everyone goes through this. Just more normal families have a father the mother is interested towards and that leaves you alone. Did you have compulsive symptoms?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        That’s very true. Yeah, I did. Part of it was cleaning, but a lot of it was also political stuff. I was into utilitarianism for a while and I’d try to quantify how much I “owed” to various causes for various sins. I had to donate any money that I didn’t absolutely need to survive, and I had to spend any free time working for activist clubs that my mother wanted me to join (mostly environmentalist things). If I didn’t do it right, I had to self harm.

        Looking back, I know there’s some good in activism, but I definitely saw a lot of people in those groups who were more similar to me than they’d like to admit and just had a very unhealthy relationship to the work.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Jung split with Freud because he felt the latter put too much emphasis on child sexuality, he thought that libido and psychic conflicts were about more than physical gratification at their base, and that sex was fundamentally about creativity, reproduction, and the generative principle. For Freud, the point was that sexuality is about bodily pleasure, and that that this kind of desire for physical gratification (i.e., sexuality) was the vital force that animated our minds throughout their development, so that all subsequent forms of enjoyment become predicated on it and reducible to it. They're saying different things and can't both be right, so just saying Jung includes and surpasses Freud is kind of trying to have your cake and eat it too.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Jung makes the point himself that his conception of the relation of the libido to the Mother-image and the backflow of libido into external pursuits is a further derivation of Freud's incest barrier and Oedipus Complex ideas. Freud's model is just reductive and does not holistically apply to the entirety of the psychological development.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Jonathan Haidt - The Righteous Mind
    Robert Cialdini - Influence

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    jung wasn't psychoanalysist tho

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