/lit/ - Literature

this might be helpful. a lot of it is about philosophy tho, iirc he only gets to Freud towards the end

>>12575430
Cool, thanks.

>>12575416
Depends what you want from psychoanalysis.

If you want to read it for the sake of theory, read a metric shit ton of Freud (5 lectures/introductory lectures -> dreams or metapsychology papers -> BPP -> Ego/Id should be enough). This isn't a "start with the greeks thing." You will not have an adequate grasp of Lacan, D/G, or anyone other French asshole if you don't read a shit ton of Freud.

From there, it would be sensible to move to Lacan if your goal is to gain a deep understanding of the tradition which includes D/G, Zizek etc.
I would recommend Fink's intro to Lacan first, as he's AIDS to read. Four fundamental concepts and the mirror stage essay are good places to go once you do that.

After Lacan you could feasibly move to pretty much any other theoretical daddy. You could also go to object relations instead of Lack lack, but you will not be able to get the good historical background for G, Zizek, and so on.


If you're into Jung, Jung-> Hillman makes sense. For that I'd start with man and his symbols. Don't know why some like him so much desu.


If, on the other hand, you're interested in psychoanalysis as a modern clinical practice, one that continues to exert a strong influence on actual therapy in the world outside of a part of academia, you should not do any of that.
Personally I find this kind of stuff to be far more interesting and fun to read, but I'm also working towards a PhD in clinical psychology, so I'm biased.
In this case, you should read a bit of Freud--probably the Introductory Lectures, in particular the third part (although p2 on dreams is great). From there I might read a little bit on object relations, in particular Klein's most famous paper on play therapy stands out.

The really good shit starts after that. Mitchell's intro to relational analysis or one of Kohut's easier books on self psychoanalysis are both interesting places to go if you want to invest a lot of time.

If this all doesn't really sound like your cup of tea, I would seriously encourage you to read one of Paul Wachtel's papers on cyclical psychoanalysis, his "from eclecticism to synthesis" and "from one person to two person conceptions of attachment" are FUCKING fantastic reads which may make you see psychoanalysis in a different light. He also is one of the founders of integration in psychological theoretical modalities, fusing behaviorally oriented therapies with psychoanalysis, instead of simply taking pieces from each (which is probably what most therapists do these days). You could reasonably go straight to these papers. A lot of shit will go over your head, especially if you read the second one I mentioned, but they're really good reads that I recommend to all of my friends studying humanities.

God fucking damnit I was supposed to be reading god damn fucking Kripke and now I've spent almost twenty minutes on this bullshit. Fucking read this somebody; let this not be for nothing please.

>>12575576
Thanks for your great explanation, it is well appreciated.
Pic unrelated.

>>12575576
Just to add on one thing, before some god damn fucking literature phd comes in with the "There are a lot of places till practicing Lacanian psychotherapy!!!!"

First of all, there aren't. Second of all, only half rate joke PhD programs still teach any of that dense garbage. And with good reason. Psychoanalysis has to find a way to make itself amenable to progress in cognitive science, and it has to create for itself the possibility of good empirical research, someday these things will have to happen.

For those things to happen, you need to be able to have theoretical models which are not mystical nonsense but sensible, readable, models which are, at least more or less, in line with common sense and everyday experience. Lacanian psychoanalysis will never become a model which is taken seriously by forward thinking analysts. It will never live past the 22nd century. Relational and interpersonal analysis as well as integrative therapies, I firmly believe, open the doors to the future of psychoanalysis.

>>12575623
Thank you anon! You really did just make me feel less like a piece of shit.
I'm gonna go read, but ill be checking back on this thread if you, or anyone else, has questions concerning psychoanalysis.

I can also answer some lighter questions on the other big forms of therapy and clinical neuropsychology.

>>12575416
start with Freud, it all starts with him. Interpretation of Dreams is a good one if you are looking for how psychoanalysis applies to literature.

>>12575637
Do you know any good theory i can talk about Blake with - i'm doing a project.
I think it's interesting how people try to frame him like a sane genius when he was clearly a mad genius - how people try to appropriate the mad ones into the fold as soon as they obtain recognition. It kinda relates to Deleuze i think, but a quote would be fantastic...

>>12575681
Interesting project. I have to admit this is definitely not my area of expertise, but I'll do my best.
Also, I wasn't in any way bashing theory as a whole, or psychoanalytic theory specifically, in my last post. I have gained a lot from reading theory/continental stuff, and although I do not think it fits the goals of clinical science, I would never in my life shit on someone for studying the people I mentioned, even if I don't like Lacan. Just thought I should mention that; I'm definitely not an analytic, nor am I all about making analysis a science.

I think you're right to think of Deleuze. I'm sure the C&S series would be your best bet, but I've only read his books on Nietzschee and Kafka. Here are a couple interesting quotes from the Kafka you might like, but maybe they're totally irrelevant.
“How many people today live in a language that is not their own? Or no longer, or not yet, even know their own and know poorly the major language that they are forced to serve? ...the problem of a minor literature but also a problem for all of us: how to tear a minor literature away from its own language, allowing it to challenge the language and making it follow a sober revolutionary path?”

Kafka sees in a dream: "The whole staircase was littered from top to bottom with the loosely heaped pages I had read. That was a real wish-dream."6 A mad desire to write and to tear the letters away from their addressee.

The book is probably on aaaaarg if you need it.

You could, of course, look into Foucault's stuff on madness. It would probably be helpful for your purposes. I'm sure Nietzsche has some stuff on madness and art that would be relevant. Although maybe a bit tangential, Feyerabend's stuff on Galileo and the Coepernican revolution could be interesting to you.

This might not be helpful, but what you were saying vividly reminded me of something. I remember speaking once to someone who was telling me about some pop psych type shit. The argument was sort of cheesy but maybe interesting. It went something like this:
Schizophrenics are treated as severely disadvantaged, impossible to deal with, not able to be integrated into society etc They're pretty much at the bottom tier of society, but shamans in [some part of the world], who would now be diagnosed with schizophrenia, were fairly high up in the power structure of their society. Others in that place, with different (maybe pathological by our current standards as well) mental temperaments were cast to the bottom. Point is, the criteria for madness largely means what you do within your society. Extending the idea to what you're saying: what we view Blake as having done causes us to revise our criteria for madness or create some kind of "exception" for him maybe?

>>12576126
I meant Kuhn not Feyerabend

>>12575576
Kind of off topic, but what are your thoughts on the use of hypnosis in a therapeutic environment? I've been reading some older psychology texts recently and they all seem to be very enthusiastic about its use. But i really don't know what the modern consensus on it is.

>>12575637
Meeting with my therapist in 2 hours what can I say to really make her worry about my mental health. Thanks

>>12576359
People do use it. I'm not under the impression that it's terribly common, but people do not view it as spooky fiction either. It's typically used as an additional tool alongside psychotherapy. For example I know a CBT practitioner specializing in health psych who had a client see a hypnotherapist for managing pain. Also, some others use it to help stop obsessive behavior. I don't know a whole lot of theory on the state of someone in hypnosis, but it's much easier to suggest changes in behavior which can translate to everyday life, and I think exploring repressed memories, or memories with a lot of negative affect tied to them, is much easier as well. Definitely not some crazy state where you can manipulate someone into going against their core values, nor can you get someone to recall every little event in their life, but it's also not bullshit magic.

>>12576391
If you have some kind of angry or paranoid tendencies and you're at least open to drug use, which I think encompasses a sizable chunk of the people on this board, then tell her you were in some (contextually plausible) situation in which you tried a heavy psychedelic and slipped into brutal emotionally charged hallucinations (again make these plausible). Tell him/her that you felt like someone else was controlling your feelings. Speak with less affect than you would normally. Since it has worn off, you've been deeply depressed, cant sleep, horrified, keep getting weird persisting feelings and thoughts that you feel like are inexplicably disconnected from you, sometimes you can't even respond to people, other times you can't stop snapping angrily at people, you can't carry out your daily tasks, are directly threatening you somehow, hearing whispering from objects and animals etc.
God I would shit my pants don't actually do this if you want to continue with this therapist

Okay going to sleep now. Will answer any more questions tomorrow if the thread is still up.

>>12575576
>kripke
>psych
you nibbas reading naming and necessity ot what

>>12576453
eh, its an intervention in psychosis team and a 1/3rd of thats true anyways. May aswell double down.
I was just gonna wear odd socks.

>>12576453
Thanks for the insight. It's nice to see these kinds of threads on /lit/.

>>12576453
Trainee therapist here, I would have said something practically identical to this in terms of "what can I say to frighten the shit out of my therapist". Don't be tempted to embellish anything beyond what this poster said, though, if I heard something like that from a patient in my country national healthcare system I would want you to be fucking sectioned.

>>12575627
Lacan's stuff is still interesting, but in my experience the only "Lacanian practitioners" I've come across have been French women with humanities degrees into nu-age therapy bullshit desu

>>12576453
Thank you psychology anon. What kind of work are you looking to do with your PHD and any advice for a first year pursuing a psych degree?

>>12576673
>>12576453
"what can I do to frighten my therapist" anon here
Your thoughts on EMDR? That's what Im going to start. Lots of staring at fingers.
Sounds fucking insane that you can do some mock REM sleep like that.

>>12575416
Dont go into deep psychoanalysis its mostly BS.
Most of mental illness is pathologically based.
Read on epigenetics and neurobiology

in short you dont have problems because daddy didnt hug you enough, but because of pathological issues, from a virus to drug abuse, from pollution to heavy metal poisoning.

>>12576949
I doubt that. Brent Roberts’ sociogenomic model of personality, which cites animal studies and epigentic triggers extensively, argues that one’s personality is molded mainly by life experiences. I assume this could apply to mental illnesses as well to some extent.

If everything is pathological as you say, would you care to explain how pollution and/or heavy metals lead to anorexia or another eating disorder?

Read criticisms of it from the neurosciences and understand it has no basis in reality.

Don't do it OP you'll regret it.

>>12577060
Work with mentally ill patients.
90% of their parents are barely functioning mentally ill people.
Once you get to know the famillies of patients you will see its genetic.
Others have comorbidity with autoimmune disorders like lupus etc.
The only thing that helps them is drugs because guess what its pathological. No amount of psychotherapy will ever help them if they dont get their medicine.
As medicine and especially the study of genetics progresses more and more things we thought about are becoming evident that everything is gene related.
Mentally ill people need psychoeducation and medicine. Stay away from psychologists and bs Lacan analysis.

>>12575430
holy fucking shit this looks like a great read, thanks!

this thread is now about lesser known psychology books that are actually interesting and/or useful

>>12575576
dw this looks like chart worthy stuff

>>12577082
>Where is the chemicals and drugs! This doesn't make sense!

>>12575416
I haven’t read anybody else’s answers so at he the risk of repeating what’s already been said I’ll give my own.

It depends on why you want to learn it, but I’m gonna assume you are interested in literature and interpretation.

Of course you gotta start with Freud. He’s actually a pretty good writer so there is no reason why you can’t just jump in. Here is my recommenced order, the essentials have a (*).


Introduction;
Outline of Psychoanalysis (a short summary Freud wrote late in life)
Introductory Lectures *
New Introductory Lectures

Mainline Texts;
(Early)
The Interpretation of Dreams *
Psychopathology of Everyday Life
Jokes and Their Relationship to the Unconscious
Three Essays on Sexuality *
(Late)
Beyond the Pleasure Principle*
The Ego and the Id

I don’t think his social criticism books are all that essential, even if they are popular.
If you want a book length study, Jon Leer’s Freud (2nd Ed) is good.

I don’t really like Jung, but I have the book Jung’s Map of the Soul by Stein and it seems like a good overal introduction to Jung’s system.

Unlike Freud, Lacan sucks to read. To the point I’m not sure it’s productive to try, versus just reading more secondary lit. The Lacanian Subject by Bruce Fink is the best introduction I’ve come across. There are a few earlier ones in English but they totally neglect his later work. If you want an a softer intro to that intro, try the book by Sean Homer.

It’s optional but you might want to read some of the stuff that influenced Lacan other than Freud. Reading a bit of Saussure’s course on linguistics, and Koyeve’s course on Hegel will help you get where Lacan is coming from with his interpretation of Freud.

The history of Psychoanalysis in France by Roudinesco is excellent if you want to dive into the context in which Lacan was working.

If you want to go to Zizek next, it’s important to read at least Althusser's essay on ideological state apparatus first, and depending on what book of Zizek’s a little Heidegger and a lot more Hegel.

The work of Guattari’s I see talked about (when he’s mentioned separate from D) is Three Ecologies. Felix Guattari: A Critical Introduction by Gary Genosko is the only introduction I’ve ever come across so I hope it’s good.

>>12575576
terrific post anon, thx for taking the time. appreciated

>no Fromm
>only one mention of Klein
>no Reich
>no Anna Freud
You guys are pseuds

>>12577564
Thank you for taking the time - the Freud list will especially be appreciated.

>>12577166
Yeah, a flowchart is really needed

Freud, Jung, Von Franz, Campbell, Hillman.
Is this a good depth psychology list? And which books will you guys recommend?

>>12575576

>clinical psychology
>Not really a fan of Jung

I used to be like you.

Culture of Critique
This board is a Jewish psyop.

>>12577884
>Muh drugs
Please share some info on nootropics if you like though.

>>12576126
>but shamans in [some part of the world], who would now be diagnosed with schizophrenia
this got me thinking.

what is the most unique spot of psychoanalysis differentiating with academic fields of human psyche, can be the defend of blatant calling psychoanalysis being "consumed by modern science"?

in other words, what part of psychoanalysis theory seems to have really good explanation, or good performance at it when such as psychiatry and neuropsychology incredibly suck at?

what is the final blow of psychoanalysis?

>>12577745
Weird that on a literature board the discussion of Psychoanalysis mainly revolves around Psychoanalyists who have been taken up in by people interested in the interpretation of literature.

Why not also talk about Bion, Winnicott or any number of other analysts involved in the development of PA as a clinical practice? That’s the bucket where Klein, Anna Freud, and Adler go. And while Fromm and Reich have a lot to say about politics, they don’t have a lot to do with literature or its interpretation.

After getting some handle on Lacan I’ve got two things that people here would probably find interesting.

First is his debate with Derrida over the interpretation of Edger Allen Poe’s The Purloined Letter. Both their essays and a bunch of secondary lit is in the book ‘The Purloined Poe’.

Second is the work of Julia Kristeva and specifically her book Powers of Horror. She has a lot to say about literature and the nature of the sublime in there.

>>12576453
Wow so many great questions! I have to stay late at work, but I’ll answer all the ones up later tn if the thread is still up

>>12575416

>>12575416
Thanks OP.
Tried to start this thread a few days ago and it failed.

>>12578099

It's obviously mostly just a joke. Nootropics are mostly shit and the studies typically have low validity. The only one's that actually have an impact are modafinil/adderall/methylphenidate/nicotine/cafféine.

Ok im bacco

>>12576462
Hahaha no I just am really interested in the philosophy of language. I'm hoping to do clinical neuropsych and psychoanalysis, and I think a ton of problems within neuropsych/cog sci could be made far more clear with a careful use and understanding of the language works (and I just really love philosophy). Also I'm a really firm believer in studying philosophy when doing clinical psychology and really any science in its infancy. I am reading naming and necessity. I don't agree with Kripke at all, but he's important, and you need to read people you disagree with in order to sharpen your own ideas. I'm pretty firmly against this continental/analytic bullshit; there's good and bad philosophy on both sides. The only time the distinction is useful is when youre trying to diagnose a particular brand of shittyness in philosophy.

>>12576673
Definitely interesting, and I second your experience.

>>12576753
I'm looking to do clinical neuropsychology and psychoanalysis! Great question. I can only speak from a US perspective. Here there three (good/main) paths to becoming a practicing clinician: MA in social work, PsyD, clinical PhD. I can answer questions about what each entails if you want, but it sounds like you want meaningful advice.
Concerning your question, there is the generic advice:
If you want to do the PhD (which is for research and practice typically) youre going to need good grades, basically >3.5 gets you in the door. Any less, and you won't get into a good program. Past a 3.5, your GPA DEFINITELY won't get you in and it won't keep you out (in most places). Far more important than having a 3.9 is good research experience. I would start looking at the end of your sophomore year if you can. I, however, started psych very late (end of my junior year). And while starting research late doesn't make the whole thing impossible, it makes the process take longer. I didn't start doing research until the end of mr sr. year. Plus it's best to figure out if research is for you early on, as a TON of people end up hating it.
For a PsyD there are other requirements. GPA isn't as competitive. Research doesn't matter as much, and clinical exp matters a lot more.

Now for advice which is way more fucking important than any of that. If you want to do psychology in a clinical setting, the worst thing you can do is to study a shit ton of psych in your undergrad. This is a murky, unclear, speculative field that demands knowledge in both the sciences and the humanities. Read great fucking books, study quantum mechanics, read classics, eat a tab of acid and cry while listening to Echoes by Pink Floyd, study philosophy, set your pubic hair on fire, and so on. My point isn't to do any single one of those things of course. Instead, indulge your passion for learning about a whole bunch of shit while studying in university. I fucking hate this hyper specialization model in the US. out of words will continue in following post.

>>12581076
>>12576753
Some of the greatest innovations in psychology come from a synthesis with other fields. And I guarantee you that the most brilliant minds in clinical psych did not limit themselves to the infantile science of psych. Literature and philosophy have opened the avenues in my thinking.
To give an example off the top of my head, the inventor of the insanely influential structural analysis of social behavior (SASB) model studied primates before inventing her model. And while I don't find it to be a terribly great theory, it's obviously a good idea. I think Klein also has a great quote about this. Anyways that's my preachy ass advice. Good luck! I really wish you the best anon. It's a really rewarding and interesting field.

>>12576899
I'm really torn on EMDR personally. On the one hand, it definitely works for a lot of people. On the other hand, I'm not convinced people know exactly what the process does to you in a clear way. That in itself makes me suspicious of it. If you're in a therapy which you're happy with, but you really need the kind of treatment EMDR offers, then go for it!

My main problem with it is the problem I have with drugs: I firmly believe mental health treatment does not involve only a relief of symptoms, but an exploration of one's relationships, wants, personality etc. Drugs and EMDR in conjunction with therapy can be fucking great! On their own, I think there's a pretty serious ethical violation going on. You go in suffering, pop some pills, feel better, and get back to school/work. I think patients typically come in with the expectation that they will not only feel better, but figure out, at least in part, what is going on with them. And no well respected scientist under the age of 60 working primarily in the field of mental health will feed you the "depression is an imbalance of neurotransmitters" these days because it's obviously not true. Your environment plays a huge role. In fact the idea of nature vs. nurture is honestly a pretty good example of this abuse of language I was talking about earlier imo. Sorry for the rant. Bottom line, I'm suspicious, but it definitely helps a lot of people.

>>12577884
Hahaha maybe I'll change my mind someday!

>>12578132
This is the main question I'm working on right now. My stance is that psychoanalysis is a type of myth making grounded in clinical practice. This isn't to its detriment, nor does it entail that analysis has nothing to gain from the sciences. It does mean that the kind of "truth" we're after in psychoanalysis--that is, the whole approach to understanding clinical phenomena--should be fundamentally different from the sciences. Theoretical models comporting themselves to be scientifically valid within the field should be taken with a serious grain of salt. Analysis is a way of making sense of life and mental illness.

I know this sounds very handwavy, and it is at the moment. continuing next post.

>>12581185
I know this sounds very hand wavy, and it is at the moment. But I recently had a big turning in my view on the epistemological status of psychoanalytic theory, and I'm trying to approach it in a different light. I'm hoping to study much more philosophy of science soon in order to come up with a good theory about this. If I try to get into details right now, I know it'll just come out like a decorative mound of shit.

>>12578132
Oh another part of your question: "where does it excel at?"

I think I very vaguely answered that, but I wanted to mention one more thing:

On all standard evaluations of the efficacy of psychotherapy, almost every major modality (including analysis and CBT) has the same effect size. That is to say, it is either right now impossible to quantify the differences in success between orientations, or all orientations work as well as each other. This is a HUGE PROBLEM in clinical psych. It's called the "Dodo Bird" problem if you want to look more into it.

Just thought I should mention

>>12580028
It’s not really that useful. It’s not anything like a systematic intro to Lacan, and is more like a intro to Zizek

>>12581076
I meant don’t ONLY study psych. Definitely study a ton of clinical psych if you want to do psych. Study a shit ton of a it. Just don’t ONLY study it.

I vomited all of this out while typing, and I’m sure I made a bunch of errors and misrepresented my thoughts by being too sloppy and vague. I’m happy to elaborate later if there are any more questions/problems.

>>12581283
Thank you so much, you sound like a kind, intelligent person. I am currently studying neuroscience but I was considering double majoring in that and psych, I will take your advice into consideration. I definitely agree with you on studying broadly and outside of psychology. Before the thread dies:
What are your thoughts on the Big Five Model of Personality and its limitations? I'm not sure how relevant it is to clinical psychology but I was curious what your thoughts were on it. Would it be ok with you if I dropped a burner email on here so we communicate further in the future?

>>12581283
Wow thanks for the thread my dude. I'm a psych undergrad about to graduate and am deciding to go into ergonomics for my masters so I can go into tech, this is all after studying neuro on the side and being involved in neuro and cog research. Although I do not have nearly as much experience as you do, I agree with everything you said about branching out. My biggest limitation in psych has been being a psych student.

Anyway, my question for you, is how can I, and what should I read to, understand and analyze people and situations as if I was omniscient?

I find myself drifting towards this behavior often because I am so often alone. I just love knowing what people are thinking - from afar, and in a 1 on 1 conversation. I also love understanding groups and dynamics.

Any help is appreciated. Thanks.

>>12581283
Also, seeing as you aim to understand the psyche in all of its glory, how do you feel about redpill culture? I.e. pickup artist, nationalism, and general 4chan views or alt right uprisings. Do you believe in the black white IQ gap is accurate of an intelligence gap? Have you read mismeasure of man, if so, how do you reconcile Gould being called out for finagling data?

Thoughts on Erich Neumann Origins and History of Consciousness?

>>12581880
not him but any literature by authors renowned for their knowledge of human nature like dosto would likely help you

>>12581993
Any others? Already read C&P. It was okay. Didn't learn a whole bunch. I guess I learned that you're not who you think yourself to be, and experience can play a large part of your self knowledge? Would be cool to hear others lessons from that novel.

>>12582046
I'm halfway into C&P at the moment, so I haven't had much time to reflect on it yet. I found Raskolnikov's sense of isolation following the murder to be interesting ("I just want to be alone, alone!"). The most useful thing I've learned so far is the danger of the thoughts you entertain; Rodia spent so much time contemplating the murder it festered in his head and became reality. I'm more careful with the thoughts I entertain now.

>>12582093
Ahh, that's an excellent point. Yes, thoughts do become reality, but that is quite an old adage now, that one hardly needs to dig into literature to discover it. Although having it animated is a different thing. Rodya did not fester on the murder so much as he did on his own grandiosity, which manifested into the murder. But that would have happened while he was in school.

>psychoanalysis thread leads to Dostoevsky discussion
Dr Peterson, how are you doing?

>>12582131
>shaming people for getting into Dosto

>>12582103
Which translation did you read? I own Sidney Monas' and I enjoy it quite a bit, although he writes dialogue where characters drag out words as "ye-e-e-s" for example, which can be jarring. I don't know if your copy has this as well.

I remember as well that it bothered me that Lizaveta interrupted the murder. I wonder if his conscience would have tormented him as much if it had only been the cruel woman he killed

>>12582136
No shame from me, maybe I like the boogieman JP

>>12582139
I read Constance Garnett's, thinking about rereading for P&V meme. I enjoyed it also. Ya, that part was interesting, because Dostoevsky was essentially capturing that "of course the one time I decide to murder her, someone visits her unexpectedly" feeling. It is a very quintessential thing that happens. Like a murphys law.

I think it may have played into his guilt, but it also shows his on the spot thinking. He HAD to kill her, and so he did.

>>12582150
Ahh, ya. JP is alright, but I'm not sure I like how he exaggerates his illness and uses hyperbole as if he doesn't realize that it's confusing.

>>12581537
Wow thank you so much!! It really is much appreciated.

Regarding the big 5, I'm not really a huge fan of it for my purposes. For practical reasons it doesn't really appeal to me. Theoretically I'm a little suspicious at the way some people look at it. Basically, I don't think it's a complete account of the fundaments of personality. In fact, I think the idea of making "core" aspects of the personality generalized over relationships, with the same categories for every person, is misguided. I definitely don't think that it says nothing at all about a person's personality. But, I'd be much more inclined to look to other personality measures such as some of the questionnaires based on SASB (I think it's called intrax off the top of my head), some of the tests motivated by attachment theory and a test in psychoanalysis based off of this model called the core conflictual relationship theme (CCRT) for reasons that I'm too sleepy to go into, but id be willing to expand on later if there's interest.

You can definitely drop an email here! I can't promise that I'll respond quickly, and honestly I can't guarantee that I won't at some point drop off, as my life is incredibly busy at the moment, but I'd be happy to speak to you over email! You're at a really exciting and overwhelming time; I'd be happy to help out.


>>12581880
>>12581907
I'll answer these tomorrow if the threads up. I'm too sleepy

>>12582190
Thank you for all you've contributed to this thread, you're one of the most helpful posters I've seen on /lit/ in a while. Please drop me a message at
gasuh@hotmailpro.info
before you go to bed, I would love to talk with you further.

>>12582190
>>12582299
I fear the tempmail address will expire by the morning; try zelazny70@protonmail.com

>>12575576
I'm studying to become a clinical psychologist and will be meeting my first >real client in a couple of days. Major wew. Chose to receive mentoring in psychodynamic therapy rather than CBT (for a bunch of reasons). Jeremy Safran and his relational therapy is big in my uni. I see that you mention Mitchell, so guessing you're into relational analysis as well?

Much appreciate the tips, books and links. Integrating behavioral activation with analysis sounds interesting. Will be sure to look through the papers you mentioned, Kohut and Mitchell.

Just started reading Rogers' "On Becoming A Person". Good idea?

Thanks mate

>>12581185
Do you think your synthesis with multiple disciplines (science, phil, psych, etc) will somehow help you arrive at some universal model? Or rather just a 'better' model?

Hey PsychAnon (or anyone in this thread), What are your thoughts on Frued's concept of 'evenly-suspended attention'? He mentions it in his methodology papers and describes it as attuning ones unconscious to the patents by not focusing on anything in particular, but merely allowing your intuition to guide the session. It seems like an interesting concept to me, though i'm unsure as to how it matches with modern practice.
p.s. Have you read pic related? I'm looking into reading it soon.

Oh hey, this thread needs a bump.

>>12582190
I thought the big five personality factors were reached at through factor analysis? Does that not at all substantiate them in your mind? That the assessments are typically factored down to 5 or 6 things consistently while holding predictive ability?

Might not be the right thread but some of you seem to know your stuff.

Are any of the cbt books good? Any books at all to help someone with depression/anxiety? I can't get to therapy for a few months and need help.

Bump

>>12581958
I tried to post a thread on this, but it 404'd. Psychanon if you could answer this it'd be appreciated too.

Thanks for doing a miniAMA.

>>12584908
Not that anon but CBT has been shown to increase the conscientiousness trait in middle school-aged children. Sorry but I can't find the source at the moment

Winnicot, Bolas, Stephen Mitchel from NYU.

Their stuff is good since most people use object relations and attachment theory now.

>>12575576
this is a good post

t. someone working on their psy d.

>>12575576
>>12575627
Thank you so much, I love that you could put the time and effort into this. Rekindled my spark for an interest in psychology.

>>12575627
yeah relational is core.

>>12586373
if everyone jumped off a cliff would you?

>>12576359
it wears off and is not truly efficacious

>>12576359
From my knowledge both Freud and Jung realized that it wasn't very helpful because the ego doesn't realise the subconscious - it's just the subconscious at play without integration.

obligatory bump so psychanon can see this thread tomorrow and answer more questions with his wealth of knowledge

>>12586986
keep up the good work

Based psychanon. Best thread I've seen on /lit/ in months.

psychoanalysis threads are cool

bump

Wow thank you guys so much for the insanely rice comments! I'm honestly touched that so many of you guys are finding my responses interesting.

I also wanted to thank you for the questions you're asking; I love talking about some of this stuff anyways! It also solidifies my knowledge to have to answer these kinds of questions.

Makes me grateful for 4chan actually.

Regarding the questions, it's really fucking late again because I had a very long day. Tomorrow is going to probably be worse. So if I don't get to all of your questions, and the thread dies out, I'll make a new thread Thursday or worst case sometime this weekend. I screen capped these already, and I'll try to do the same for new ones if they come. Because there are so many questions I'm gonna be writing very fast and so probably sloppily.

>>12581880
Sounds like you do have some great experience! That was a nice way to put it ("My biggest...").

Regarding your question, I have to say I've never thought about training that as a skill. I'm taking this question as you meaning that you're 'trying to understand the nature of two people's interaction from afar' in the sense of getting a picture of their whole relationship from a single conversation. If you mean something like "reading their immediate thoughts from their behavior" I think this can only really be really understood in the light of the former question. By this I mean that even if you could understand what they're thinking and feeling, what you would understand would be like little fragments of a picture. It would be like seeing the notation of several chess moves without seeing the preceding ones. They would be like symbols floating in space (34. Nxe4 Qxe4 means nothing).

So I think the two questions are bound up to each other. In any case, I don't personally know any specific books on the subject, but I suspect any books on the subject are gonna be hacks. I could be wrong. What I suggest you look into is some of the work by the Palo Alto group of communications theorists. Same group that came up with the double bind schizophrenia theory. I read some of their Pragmatics of Communication (I think Watzlawick was one of the authors) and liked what I read. it may not teach you rules for reading people, but it definitely sheds light on what we do in an interaction. That would be my place to start. I don't think psychoanalytic theories are going to help you with this unfortunately. People who treat psychoanalysis like that are similar to people who are obsessed with Marx, Hegel, or redpill culture: they see their problems and theories confirmed everywhere. In truth, these theories are constructed out of and for critical purposes. Ripping them out of that context can lead to disastrously reductionistic analysis. You're trying to make a movie out of a drawing; the worst thing you could do is look for the same themes in every drawing.

continuing next post.

>>12575416
One of the 4 good threads on /lit/ right now. Have you guys read Aion? How was it for you?

>>12581907
I really don't bother thinking about the black white IQ gap. I think even if it exists, it bears no practical consequences, and it definitely doesn't immediately entail that whites are smarter than blacks in itself. I haven't read that book, but I looked up the wiki entry and criticisms. I have no doubt that some people in PC culture finagle data. But you know what? All of fucking psych does the same shit. I know for a fact that a shockingly high amount (cant remember the exact statistic, but look into it if you want) of psych studies are totally invalid when repeated. Not all of those are accidents. A ton of people massage data in academia, and psychology is the worst of the worst. This is a baby science, and sciences are filled with dishonest people. It's just even easier in psych. That being the case I think people who get really mad over that specific of dishonesty are suspicious as fuck: why would you ever care about that single instance of dishonesty unless you really care about there being an IQ gap? Why the fuck would you care that much if there is/isn't one? Smells like some racism masquerading as a call for honesty to me.
I mean regarding redpill culture I think it's wrong and retarded. I'm assuming you mean why do I think it exists? That is a pretty big question that would take so long to respond to. it involves making sweeping generalizations over a large population of men, and thus requires careful language and deliberate thought. I suspect if you agree with my ideas, you wouldn't learn much except new arguments against people you disagree with. If you disagree with me, you wouldn't be convinced by me. People don't change their minds on these issues bc they're hit with arguments on 4chan, so I don't see the point spending a lot of time writing it out. Sorry, but I hope the rest of my answer has been helpful.

>>12581958
Someone vaguely described the structure of the book to me once. Sounds interesting! Unfortunately dont know anything about it.

>>12581993
>>12582046
Whew I could write essays on this stuff! Love that book. For me, maybe the most profound thing I got form it was a challenge: an intensional revaluation of values, trying to overcome morals, has a boundary. This pseudo-Nietzschean project Rodya has in the beginning of course fails to run from the call of conscience, of guilt. Heidegger passed by this problem in the second part of being and time and Nietzsche acted it out. This all really applies to all sorts of intentional behavior modification!!!

God philosophy is so much better than P.analysis for reading lit.

>>12582677
Oh Safran has some great stuff! Such a tragic loss... I've heard from many of the people who worked with him that he was an amazing guy. If I had to choose, I would say I am relational when it comes to analysis yes.

Those papers are definitely great! I think you'll really enjoy them with your knowledge. Wachtel also founded this conference for integration. cont.

>>12582677
Hope you enjoy them.
Definitely a good idea. I mean im definitely not Rogerian, and I disagree with im, but he's totally worth reading! Super influential and very worthwhile to learn from. I've only read some papers, so I can't say about OBAP, but I've heard good things.

>>12582767
Hmm I'm not sure I have what it takes to come up with a good original model. I'm too smart to come up with a stupid one, and I'm too stupid to come up with a good one I fear. I hope I'm wrong, and that I will achieve this dream someday. I fully intend to try. My ideas right now only look like interesting links between people. If it should be the case that I can touch upon something profound and original, then it will no doubt be a result of everything outside of psych.

>>12582940
Have not read it unfortunately. But I know some people at the NPAP in NYC who have recommended his stuff to me. Gotta get around to it someday.
Regarding Freud's ideas, this kind suspension of immediate theoretical imposition when listening is incredibly important in my opinion. Even when just listening to a friend complaining about their life when you want to help, it's so easy to latch onto one aspect you find interesting and salient. This is just bad listening most of the time.

>>12584785
Sorry I should've emphasized this more in my original post: it definitely says something significant about personality. It's just for my purposes, I find other measures more relevant and informative. And I don't think what we mean in our ordinary, or even our psychological, use of the word 'personality' is totally captured by a metric like the big 5. It's obviously miles better than Myers briggs or something; it's just that when I talk about personality I need more than what the big 5 offers. Still super interesting to study and not an unsubstantiated endeavor/metric! Something like CCRT for example, gives a fragment of the personality which the big 5 wouldn't be able to perfectly predict: what is your central interpersonal struggle and what are the behaviors from your self and other which accompany it? I don't think CCRT offers a complete answer to that question either, but it picks up on something which is left out of big 5 and is central for my kind of interests when I think about someone's personality. Different goals different info. There's no totalizing metric for something as many faced as personality.

>>12584908
Ah fuck I feel for you anon. That's a shitty situation to be in. I hope you find proper treatment soon. It really is worth it, and it's a fucking shame that it's hard to get, and it's often hard for people to get themselves to go--which is not to say that this is the case for you.
I really wish I could give you a really informed account on the literature, but this isn't my area of expertise. I have heard good things about Knauss' books from actual CBT people. If I were you, I would find some CBT practitioners with PhDs or PsyDs from good schools, and email them explaining that you can't get therapy and you need guidance on self help CBt books for your symptoms. They'll all be very busy, but at least one will get back to you. Therapists gotta make money, but they didn't go into therapy for that reason.

>>12588574
>>12581907
I of course didn't mean this as a defense of potential academic dishonesty. If Gould did massage data, then that's wrong and it should be corrected. I'm just very wary of people who invest a ton of time and effort into debunking or confirming this kind of stuff.

>>12588657
>>12582940
meant this "latching onto" as a potential instance of what could go wrong when you don't abide by the crux of this idea when listening to someone in these kinds of contexts.
Obviously you will grab on to something when asking questions, giving your opinion, or giving an interpretation. I didn't mean to say you shouldn't ever focus on particular things a person said or use theory to think about what people say of course.

Damn reading my responses is painful. Wish I could go back and fix all the spelling errors and bad/repetitive phrasing.
It's hard to write about complicated things quickly and clearly. If anything is unclear or just unbearably badly written, let me know. This was very fast writing after a day filled with writing.

>>12582677
Just glanced back at this question before bed. Forgot to wish you good luck with your patient! Big whew for sure but very exciting.

>>12588574
>>12588657
>>12588892
I read the two Wachtel papers. "From one person to two person conceptions of attachment" was an amazing read, and the other wasn't bad either (while I enjoy the idea of using fantasies and imagery therapeutically, it just feels weird reading about it). I'm no stranger to attachment theory, nor the arguments for why two person psychology is preferable, but I hadn't before read anything that goes to such lengths to combine the subjects, and tie it all back to evolutionary theory. I'm mostly in agreement with his conclusions. Do you know which of his books would be a good place to start with him?

I like his ideas about integration, as I feel slightly impoverished by the fact that I don't have access to some CBT techniques that I think could be very useful at times. Seamlessly integrating them into analysis would be great.

Mostly looking forward to seeing my patient, though of course it's always scary when something 'big' is going to happen, and you don't yet know how it will be, how it will feel. Guess I'll find out on friday :^)

>>12588574
>>12588657
>>12588746
Thanks psychanon, you're too good to us.

Bumpo

>>12588574
>I really don't bother thinking about the black white IQ gap.
ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away

>I think even if it exists
it does. about an entire standard deviation of difference in the USA, more across the globe.

>it bears no practical consequences
IQ is the most valuable socioeconomic indicator we have of all sorts of outcomes. if you were to replace every white man with a black man of comparative IQ in the USA, all else held equal, you could measure the loss of economic output to the tune of trillions of dollars.

>I have no doubt that some people in PC culture finagle data. But you know what? All of fucking psych does the same shit.
there's something sinister about an entire culture of manipulating data to suit a particular ideological narrative. tweaking the numbers out of the selfish desire to get published is far more petty if anything.

>unless you really care about there being an IQ gap?
anyone who cares about living in an advanced society would. what do you think is the minimum average IQ requirement to live in a free society?

>Smells like some racism masquerading as a call for honesty to me.
I would have no problem allowing non-white but high IQ immigrants and pushing trades on predominantly black schools to maximize outcomes for all backgrounds. I don't think we should treat people as second-class citizens for their IQ. but it doesn't mean that I can ignore the impact on IQ in an increasingly cognitive-demanding age.

>People don't change their minds on these issues bc they're hit with arguments on 4chan
funnily enough, "race" (misnomer, cline is better) realism is probably the most convincing out of all of the heterodox crap you'll encounter here.

for shame, I thought you would be more rational on this issue instead of going for the canned shaming response.

>>12589621
If IQ isn't flexible, why bother? Eugenics or anti-disgenics is too ideal to happen in the world today. Why even bother worrying about how many people with low IQs there are and not how many people with high IQs there are?

>>12589621
Hey psychanon, I wanted to point out that this quoted post is not the OP of the IQ and Gould question, I am. Thanks for your answer. I, too, will give a more detailed answer to your responses, but am busy and will need time to respond. >>12588574

>>12590074
>If IQ isn't flexible, why bother?
because we still craft public policy that is willfully blind to these realities. i.e., expecting inner city schools to not only graduate all of their kids, but also to send them to college. is everyone smart enough to go to college? no, unless we want to dramatically dilute standards to the point where its useless. funny enough, that's what happened.

why not encourage trade schools, arts, and entrepreneurship instead?

>Eugenics or anti-disgenics is too ideal to happen in the world today.
they will both be an option within this century or the next. the question is whether our complex societies will collapse before we reach that milestone.

>Why even bother worrying about how many people with low IQs there are and not how many people with high IQs there are?
why not both my friend?

honestly, it sounds like you're trying your hardest to cope as if you're smugly "above it all" instead of dealing with the problem appropriately

>>12590103
I agree and understand your point. What my concern is which problem should dominate. Not enough IQ or too much low IQ? You said both, but I think the solutions to both problems acting together doesn't work(if that makes any sense).

bumpybump

>>12588746

Thanks, i'll take a look at the Knauss books.

bomp

Hey Psychanon, such a great thread. Definitely hard to come by these days when /lit/ is so often concerned with how to get pussy and how not to kill themselves (the two are often interlinked of course...)

Can I get your opinion on psychotherapy / psychotherapists ?? Because I'm in the process of doing pre-req courses to get into a program to become a psychotherapist (in Canada). I'd love to know what you think would make me a good one or if the field is worth going to ?

For my life info, heres the long story short:

Did philosophy and 'contemporary studies' undergrad, then did MA in philosophy (wrote it on Nick Land actually LOL) and then had a total break down over a number of issues, went to a psychotherapist dude who calmly saw right through my anger and bullshit and now I'm less likely to womanize to the point of exhaustion, do insane drugs in underground nightclubs in Kiev, and steal a shit load of books (mostly philosophy and literature ones though!)... Basically I have learnt how to empathize more and now understand that the world is full of broken people like me who need someone to talk to and who will actually listen more than anything. So I think Psychotherapy would be a good match considering I'm social, have a good grasp of the literature (I like Irvin Yalom the most so far) and I think human problems are very much existential, angst ridden, and overall meaning based - PLUS I've felt a lot of pain therefore I can relate to people in numerous ways (drugs, alcohol, sex, risk-taking, nihilism, etc etc you name it)

Blog post over, but if I could get your opinion then that would be fantastic. It's refreshing to realize that smart, likeable and friendly people lurk on /lit/, even though most of the time people are ironic assholes that hate themselves and their lives and seek some sort of validation and purpose by posting sarcastic memes here - laughing on the outside but crying on the inside. For all you out there: go talk to someone, it helps man. If I did it then you sure as hell can :)

[Pic related: the quote is actually the most humaniststic thing Land has written... it's just that he doesn't know / wouldn't want to acknowledge it. Tomorrow can take care of itself because today is of the highest priority - we can prepare for tomorrow by excelling at today. At least that's what I think now...]

>>12575416
What about William James? or Abraham Maslow? I guess their not psychoanalysts in a Freudian sense but still...

>>12593763
they are easier to read and you should giddy up and read more stuff. This thread was kind of talking about investing time in psycho-dynamics and it's related philosophical literature.

What are some good books on positive psychology? Everyone brings up Maslow, but nobody brings up his successors.

bump

Bumping for psychanon

good thread

What is the best Jung? Happy Valentines too.

Bumping.

>>12593748
If your MA dissertation is available online, I think I may have read it.

>>12593763
I really feel a kindred thought process with William James. Not that I possess his gift for illustrative vocabulary.

Since we are having a psychoanalytics thread, what is your diagnosis for modern society anons? Feel free to focus on a specific region, for example, why is the EU so welcoming to foreigners. White guilt? What are your theories behind these phenomenons?

My diagnosis is: the superego has consumed the self.

>>12597444
Germany has always had a superego pathology, they are just changing its medium out now and then.

>>12597746
This doesn't mean that refugees should not be helped - because I think they should. The way Germany has been doing it is just in an awfully pathological way. At the same time western of Europe adopts American pathologies with the culture and is thus also pathological, and in reaction against this eastern Europe adopts Russian ideas, culture and pathologies... So it's all just a shitshow.

But maybe my analysis is not so accurate - I haven't read that much psychoanalysis.

>>12597444
>My diagnosis is: the superego has consumed the self.
sounds good

>>12597444
narcissism
t. the last psychiatrist

>>12597746
Hitler was a superego? Hitler may have been too strong ego and current psyche is a pendulum swing. Denying ego and overexpressed superego.

what would be a good read for an autistic individual? i have trouble interpreting social cues (physical ones mostly, rarely verbal) and it would help to understand the logic behind neurotypical brains

bump

>>12598411
Hitler was all superego desu

>>12599768
Why superego instead of what I said? Not being argumentative. Just wondering.

psychanon, what are your thoughts on Ellie Ragland-Sullivan's books on Lacan?

>>12597020
If you can name it then I’d be damn fucking shocked haha! I thought only like 3 people read it... Wow.

>>12600381
if your name is Stephen Overy i bet a fuckload of people have read it