I hate psuedo-intellectual fedoras constantly shitting on Freud. He never said anything wrong. You want to fuck your mom, get over it.

File: 14 KB, 212x320, Freud.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 09:55:03 2013 No.4053579 [Reply] [Original]

I hate psuedo-intellectual fedoras constantly shitting on Freud.

He never said anything wrong. You want to fuck your mom, get over it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:08:04 2013 No.4053596 Freud is the poor man's Jung anyway.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:09:03 2013 No.4053597 File: 39 KB, 300x368, you are lacan understanding.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] A lot of what he said has been either disproven or expanded upon.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:10:03 2013 No.4053599

>>4053579
>I hate psuedo-intellectual fedoras constantly shitting on Freud.

I agree. But you have to keep in mind that the people who do this have never read a word of his and are regurgitating something they remember vaguely from the intro to their Psych 101 book.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:14:04 2013 No.4053604 I like his Freudian slip diagrams. Wittgenstein should have drawn more diagrams.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:20:03 2013 No.4053613 it was unfalsifiable Want to fuck your mom? You want to fuck your mom Don't want to fuck your mom? You've repressed wanting to fuck your mom

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:23:03 2013 No.4053617 >>4053613 Freud probably wanted to fuck everything in existence, that's how he reached his conclusions. By projecting.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:27:03 2013 No.4053623 He was definitely a smart guy. It's hard to see the things before him without thinking about them in the terms that he invented.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:34:03 2013 No.4053629 >>4053623 true. also applies to marx, nietzsche, einstein.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 10:51:03 2013 No.4053662 Jung > Freud

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:01:03 2013 No.4053685 >>4053599 Well put.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:07:03 2013 No.4053697 He was full of shit. But that's okay. Psychology was in its infant days. He's to psychology to what voodoo doctors are to medicine.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:11:03 2013 No.4053700 If Freud was so smart then why did Nabokov dislike him so much? Checkmate, atheists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:42:03 2013 No.4053732 I don't HATE him; I'd probably write non-sense too if I was a coke-addicted jew

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:46:03 2013 No.4053735

Everything's wrong with Freud.

>"primordial horde" is purely made up shit, no source, nothing proves any of it even today

>logical fallacy all the time

Study his actual cases and you'll see the light.

>dude is scared of horses
>Freud analyses it as
>"Your father, did he have a mustache?"
>"Yes."
>"It looks like the thing in horses' mouth"
>"That's why you're scared of horses: you wanted to fuck your mom and your dad fucked her instead of you, which made you scared of horses because the mustache connection."

Years later, the same patient writes to him:

"It turns out, my mother told me, that when I was 3, I was violently attacked by a horse. I had no memories of that event."

Freud can reduce everything to his theory, and if you disagree, you can always say "You disagree because you repress those things."

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:47:03 2013 No.4053736 Some of his points are correct. But no not all humans are bisexual and we all don't want to fuck our mothers and kill our fathers.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:51:03 2013 No.4053741 How about if I just want to fuck Julianne Moore while calling her mommy? (Check out the movie Savage Grace if like 98% of the world you haven't seen it.)

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:57:03 2013 No.4053748 >>4053597 Which doesn't change the fact that most of modern psychology is based on Freud because it was expanded on. Lots of people just think he was nuts, which he was, but he contributed a lot.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 11:59:04 2013 No.4053752 >>4053736 >But no not all humans are bisexual if we lived in a homophobia free world, I doubt there would be anyone who would be "100%" straight.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:12:03 2013 No.4053772 >>4053700 nabokov disliked everyone becaues he was frustrated

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:14:04 2013 No.4053775 >>4053752 nice projector you got there boyo but there are a lot of 100% straight animals

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:15:03 2013 No.4053783 >>4053579 >he never said anything wrong Most of his stuff is debunked these days. What mainstream idiots don't seem to like focusing on is his actual, major contribution to the field of psychiatry in the form of psychoanalysis.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:17:04 2013 No.4053785 >>4053752 I'm not interested any penis but my own, thank you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:23:04 2013 No.4053792 >>4053752 Probly. I mean a blow job is a blow job. A mouth is a mouth. But it would be rude to not return the favor and that's where my homophobia kicks in. So it's a combo of homophobia and good manners.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:28:03 2013 No.4053795 >>4053775 You're saying you wouldn't kiss your male friends and fuck them after a few drinks if it were socially acceptable? What would stop you? A nut's a nut.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:29:03 2013 No.4053798 >>4053795 Not being gay stops me

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:30:03 2013 No.4053801 >>4053795 not being attracted to them? holy shit man your projecting is out of control

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:33:03 2013 No.4053810

>>4053798
>my typology
You wouldn't even have the barrier of "gay" to stop you. Just pure horniness, intoxication, and sensuality.

>>4053801
You've never wanted to fuck someone you weren't attracted to while drunk? You'd probably notice how nice your friends' eyes are if it weren't socially acceptable to avoid that thought at all costs.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:35:03 2013 No.4053813 >>4053810 >YOU'RE JUST REPRESSING IT go to bed freud

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:35:03 2013 No.4053814 >>4053810 all of my male friends are pretty ugly though not everyone's standards dip to ground zero when they're drunk, man

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:36:03 2013 No.4053817 >>4053810 your sultry homosexuality is not going to trick me, satan

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:39:03 2013 No.4053822 >>4053772 Nabokov was frustrated because he wanted to fuck children. See, it all makes sense. All the points are connected. It's like poetry; it rhymes.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:41:03 2013 No.4053824 sorry even when I'm drunk, Im still not attracted to males. you guys are faggots.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:46:04 2013 No.4053833

>>4053824

If there were no social mores about it, you'd have a problem with a good looking, fit male (complete with a lantern jaw and bathed in Creed Aventus) coming up and sitting on your lap, pressing his face against yours and nibbling on your ears after a few drinks?

Maybe you make you a bit more. You grab your cock, he grabs yours. And you'd stop this? Knowing you'd get a nut off, knowing you can't get anyone pregnant.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:47:03 2013 No.4053834 >>4053833 >make you a bit more make out*

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:48:03 2013 No.4053836 >>4053833 we gotta change the batteries of that projector soon

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:49:03 2013 No.4053842

>>4053810

Haha, this guy is not even trolling. People will fuck a plastic vagina but not a real life man ass hole.

The sensation is surely the same, an excitement to an erogenous zone is am excitement to an erogenous zone. The thing that controls is perception. This, however, is a dangerous concept to the common man and is something that should only be deliberated by the learned man. The reasons are obvious.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:50:03 2013 No.4053844 >>4053836 >using Freudian terminology to repress your homosexual urges

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:52:04 2013 No.4053849 >>4053842 so you agree with him

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:54:04 2013 No.4053856 What are your favourite contemporary applications of Freudian theory, /lit/? I like the snippets in Adam Phillips.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 12:59:03 2013 No.4053864

>>4053775
>there are a lot of 100% straight animals

Those animals just haven't developed mechanisms to repress their desire to kill each other like we have. They're wired for survival. If they got over that bit, they'd be fucking each other as much as they masturbate.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:18:03 2013 No.4053901 >>4053864 Nah, they're just homophobic. The patriarchy or matriarchy (depending on the species) is repressing all homosexuality to keep themselves in power.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:20:03 2013 No.4053907
File: 103 KB, 500x405, 1365955518448.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Nobody is straight or gay anymore. The operational system of total control (postmodernity) has completely neutralized the subject's mediated relation to its object (ex: your relation to a partner mediated by the referent of sexuality). You are only ever experiencing pleasure through virtual simulation models, and your own sexuality is a self-referential tautology with total reversibility. It is no longer a matter of a stable sexuality based on difference, but a sexuality in the utopia of joiussance which only answers to the master of ineluctable pleasure. Sexuality presupposes the possibility of a subject, but this subject and its various intensities disappear into the inertial black hole of objectification, fetishism, and passivity. Sexuality without a subject is a paradoxical and teleological assertion of sexual determinacy, pure symbolic fantasy in which sexuality pretends to be its own justification. Sex is but another mode through which society stages its spectacle.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:21:03 2013 No.4053909 >>4053901 Left to pure nature, no socialization, we would be even more rapey than we already are.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:27:03 2013 No.4053919 >>4053579 Obvious troll is obvious. And off /lit/ goes. This shit is getting too much.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:27:03 2013 No.4053920 >>4053849 Of course. Unless you believe in God you should absolutely be partaking in homosexuality. If you masturbate and don't partake in homosexuality then you are a prude practising seriously in cognitive dissonance.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:28:03 2013 No.4053922 >>4053907 I want more from you because this is incredibly interesting. Pleeaaaaase.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:31:03 2013 No.4053928 >>4053579 but freud was a fedora

>>	Supine !OypYdDKP3c Fri Aug 23 13:34:04 2013 No.4053931 >>4053579 His science is outdated, that doesn't mean it wasn't important.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:36:03 2013 No.4053938 >>4053931 >science.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:37:04 2013 No.4053940 Why is everyone presuming that his entire Psychoanalytical system revolved around the Oedipal-complex? It sounds like you idiots haven't read a word of Freud himself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:37:04 2013 No.4053943 >>4053597 Freud was a pioneer. If you disagree, you're from /pol/.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:44:03 2013 No.4053957 >>4053617 um. Guess who was the first guy to talk about projecting. That's right, good ol' Ziggy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:47:03 2013 No.4053961 >>4053579 >never said anything wrong >all he said was wrong ruseman

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 13:59:03 2013 No.4053982
File: 110 KB, 483x725, 1368054735872.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4053922
The simulation models stage the recovery of some lost referent, whether on the basis of a puritanical or biological interpretation of history (see post >>4053775). But this is a purely semiological strategic deployment of the signifier “sexuality” and all of the anthropological metaphysics that accompany it. Sexuality as signification has been consummated in the simultaneous determinacy and indeterminacy (reversibility) of its actuality due to the hegemony of jouissance as unmediated and impartial sexual pleasure. The freely floating system of referents, of which sexuality is a part, merely serves the functional purpose of dissimulating the fact that referents do not refer outside of a certain tautological metaphysic. That is to say, referents do not exist outside of their own self-referential and speculative play. Sexuality has staged its own resurrection to mask its very disappearance.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 14:04:03 2013 No.4053986 >>4053907 >>4053982 Bro you should start a Lacan study group on here.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 14:25:03 2013 No.4054013 >>4053986 I'd be down for a Locan/Deleuze study group

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 14:27:03 2013 No.4054017

>>4053982

Thanks to you. Only I fear that you skewer meaning with signifiers blended along-side conjecture (words, assertions, double-think etc.). Might you have a link to this study/paper/information or other permanent placement for this writing for me to meditate upon?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 14:29:04 2013 No.4054019 I have an incest fetish so I tend to agree.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 14:30:04 2013 No.4054021 >>4053907 Could you also elaborate on the system of total control? This was one of the assertions with which your whole post was based upon. I mean not to vex you. I'm only interested.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 14:53:06 2013 No.4054080 >>4053772 Not true. He was simply more discerning than most.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:04:03 2013 No.4054102 >yfw you could accuse anyone of anything just by writing a book a long time ago saying that whoever disagrees with you is repressing what you're accusing them of >yfw inconscious isn't a substantive

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:06:03 2013 No.4054103 >>4054080 Don't you know that everyone is more discerning than most?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:07:03 2013 No.4054107 >>4054102 This post is clearly a product of an ego's knee-jerk reaction. To the asylum with you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:10:03 2013 No.4054111 >>4054080 >dostoyevsky is shit >war and peace is shit >freud is shit >give me attention

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:13:03 2013 No.4054119

Freud took all his ideas from Plato.

WOW YOU GUYS HE WAS A PIONEER OMG LOOK AT HOW FREUD IS RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING OMG IS SEE FREUDIAN PSYCHOLOGY EVERYONE

IF YOU TRY TO PROVE WRONG IT MEANS YOU RESENT HIM AND ARE REPRESSING THEREBY PROVING HIM RIGHT

FREUD FREUD FREUD

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:15:04 2013 No.4054125 >>4054119 how stupid are you

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:17:03 2013 No.4054129 >>4054127 The father son and holy ghost wut?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:17:04 2013 No.4054127 >>4054125 Tripartite soul is Plato's idea. Do you even read?

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:17:04 2013 No.4054128

Freud was a hack, and absolutely nothing he wrote about is taken seriously anymore. He was the spark for the psychology movement, but all his concepts are complete pseudo-science. He wanted to fuck his mom--therefore he concluded that all men wanted to fuck their mothers.

>the mind is split into ego, id, and super ego!
>where is your proof, fraud--I mean, Mr. Freud?
>proof? I AM A PSYCHO ANALYST, WHAT ARE YOU? THE MIND IS SPLIT INTO THOSE THINGS. DISAGREE AND ILL SHOVE THE BURNING END OF THIS CIGAR INTO YOUR FOREHEAD. BY THE WAY, THIS CIGAR REPRESENTS MY SUBCONSCIOUS DESIRE TO SUCK ON A NIPPLE. IF YOU EVER SEE A WOMAN SMOKING OR HOLDING ANY LONG CYLINDRICAL OBJECT, SHE HAS PENIS ENVY AND WISHES SHE WAS A MAN.

These are things that Freud really believes. Here is Freud's dream analysis:

>ALL CREVICES ARE VAGINAS
>ALL LONG SHAFTS ARE DICKS

He'd be a A+ 4chan poster if he was alive today.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:18:03 2013 No.4054131

> there's no oedipus complex in sophocles
> there's no oedipus complex in hamlet
> believing the oedipus complex is universal
> believing psychoanalysis is a science
> not realizing that it's just a source of persuasive reasons and not causes
> not realizing Freud is ripping off Plato's Tripartite Souls
> not accepting that the analyst can be critiqued
> not realizing the importance of the here and now in psychotherapy
> needing theory at all

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:19:03 2013 No.4054133 >>4054128 Dude there is little none empirical evidence of the intrinsic workings of the mind even to this day. Fuck you. Seriously. Go slit your throat.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:19:04 2013 No.4054134 Freud is a lesson on how functional theorists using methods of reductionism can get REALLY out of hand REALLY fast!

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:19:04 2013 No.4054135 >>4054127 tripartite soul is bullshit

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:20:04 2013 No.4054136 >>4054135 Woah you've swung me.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:20:04 2013 No.4054137

This guy is a charlatan. I'm not going to say HURRR DON'T READ because there's still plenty of interesting, thought-provoking stuff in his work, but I'd advise keeping a healthy skepticism towards what you encounter. It looks very neat and sounds wildly original; that doesn't make it profound.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:20:04 2013 No.4054138 >>4054133 >all this mad >all this edge I'm not even the guy you were responding to and I think you need to stop posting

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:24:03 2013 No.4054144 >>4054138 I will not ever stop posting.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:24:03 2013 No.4054145

>>4054021
The society of total control refers to the present state of administrative and technocratic domination that maintains global hegemonic status. A society of total control signifies the death of symbolic exchange and the extermination of the referent, as well as its subsequent operationalized resurrection. The subject was still epistemically possible in a world of symbolic exchange. But the bio political technostructure, which has murdered symbolic exchange (a perfect crime which cannot be imputed to any single individual or group), has assured the reification of a subject on the basis of a totally reversible(indeterminate and determinate) and virtualized referent.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:27:04 2013 No.4054151 >>4053735 5 star post

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:29:03 2013 No.4054154 Jung > Rank > Ferenczi > Freud > Lacan

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:29:03 2013 No.4054155 >>4054128 This is an example of a shit-tier post. All dogma, clearly never read the person he's attacking, etc.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:34:03 2013 No.4054161

>>4054145

Again, it seems you're focussing on technical terms rather than attempting to communicate an actual point to the layman.

Either you understand what you're saying and you can communicate it in general terms, or you're just hiding behind curated terms such as 'subsequent operationalised resurrection' and 'bio political technostructure (perhaps you know what these terms mean, that doesn't mean they are common and understandable terms). You, to me, seem to me as if you are perhaps a CIA agent filling out a post-status report that he wishes to become as disassociated with as possible.

For example, you could have just said 'The NWO represents the end of individuality', but you chose not to for some reason, as if you NEED words to bolster your opinion somewhat.

Perhaps I am asking too much of you, perhaps I myself am dumb. Perhaps I didn't sign up for sociology. Only you know, really.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:40:03 2013 No.4054170

>>4054111
What I'm reading is that you think Nabokov was looking for attention simply because he disregarded academia's idolatry of certain authors. Sometimes I think people forget that celebrated authors are people too, and not infallible gods like Nabokov.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:41:03 2013 No.4054171

>>4054161
Not the anon you're responding to, but you should have asked him to use less jargon in the first place and pick out the words/phrases you don't understand. "Subsequent operationalised resurrection" isn't jargon btw. "Biopolitical technostructure" is, tho.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:49:03 2013 No.4054178

>>4054171

I assumed it would have been self evident. Woe is me indeed. I thought why would one intentionally attempt to overwhelm a general populace with colloquial terms?

The request still stands, of course. I still wish for the poster to re-interpret his post without the semantic riddles. I would offer the utmost respect, whatever it mean on here, if he were to come back and explain himself. He positioned himself as if he had something important to say - I'd actually like to see it being said.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:52:03 2013 No.4054183 >>4053864 you're a fucking moron humans kill each other more than pretty much any other species don't say things if you don't know things

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:52:03 2013 No.4054184 >>4054183 >humans kill each other more than pretty much any other species citation needed

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:53:03 2013 No.4054185 Freud would be alot better if he were more Jungian. inb4 hurr durr Jung was wrong because he's not a materialist We're knee deep in the Kali Yuga and it shows.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:55:03 2013 No.4054186 >>4054178 Well, you're absolutely right to ask for clarity. I understood most of his first post, but I don't get why the subject supposedly disappears "into the inertial black hole of objectification, fetishism, and passivity."

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 15:59:03 2013 No.4054193 >>4054184 http://courses.washington.edu/evpsych/aggression%20&%20warfare.pdf i figured you didn't want a whole long study chimps are pretty bad too i suppose, but they're pretty close to humans genetically

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 16:01:03 2013 No.4054196

>>4054183
Even if that were true, it does absolutely nothing to change the point. Humans have the possibility of contemplation before aggression. If other animals were capable of that, of not succumbing to their desire to kill, the animal kingdom would be rife with gay sex.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 16:21:04 2013 No.4054236
File: 1.15 MB, 2592x1936, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There are some noticeable differences between Freud's and Plato's theory of the tripartite psyche, though there are strong (and fascinating) similarities.

e.g. Plato's Logos seems to be more natural and 'pure' than Freud's ego. Nevertheless both authors claim at some point that it is the more argumentative, self-critical part of the psyche.

Plato tells the story of a man who does not wish to look at a dead body but wills himself to anyhow, subsequently calling his eyes whores, in order to explain the bottom part of the psyche, what would align rather with Freud's Id.

Finally, the thumatic part of the psyche for Plato (superego for Freud) seems to wish for approval by others and for status in society, which Freud would probably relegate more towards the ego. Still, both seems to concur that this part of the soul is where social mores manifest.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 16:25:03 2013 No.4054246 >>4054161 Language does not need an alibi.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 16:28:03 2013 No.4054252 >>4054246 Improve your rhetoric or be another forgotten jargonite.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 16:42:03 2013 No.4054282 >>4054252 Being remembered is a simulation model.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 17:04:03 2013 No.4054340 >>4053579 >You want to fuck your mom, get over it. I doesn't really have anything to do with literally wanting to fuck your mom. Do you even Lacan?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 17:06:03 2013 No.4054344 >>4054133 >>4054155 It's a copypasta.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 17:09:03 2013 No.4054351 File: 32 KB, 450x600, 1359312866029.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4054128 > He wanted to fuck his mom--therefore he concluded that all men wanted to fuck their mothers. >using projection theory to discredit projection theory

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 17:32:04 2013 No.4054421 >>4053604 >Wittgenstein should have drawn more diagrams. agreed. diagrams are good.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 17:35:03 2013 No.4054430 >>4054128 idk sounds like you take it pretty seriously

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 17:42:03 2013 No.4054443 >>4054128 sounds like someone needs to trip acid

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 17:57:03 2013 No.4054472 File: 29 KB, 675x337, FreudSignorelli.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4054421 it's disappointing it's one of the few pieces of Freud that didn't take off

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 18:02:03 2013 No.4054482

>>4053579
Most of the people I've seen discredit him were fucking morons in High School who didn't want to think that much of human action is rooted in sexuality. These are the people who heard about the Oedipus Complex and thought "ew gross". Yes, he was wrong about some things, but >>4053597 we needed him to get us all the way.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 18:08:03 2013 No.4054500 File: 163 KB, 750x819, Nietzsche187a1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4054351 mind blowen.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 18:47:03 2013 No.4054575 >>4054236 so freud is like a jewish materialist plato

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 18:49:03 2013 No.4054578 >>4054482 No, most people discredit him because he was overly reductive and dogmatic and people are willing to wager that human life is more complicated than a few a prioria Freudian principles.

Anonymous Fri Aug 23 23:34:03 2013 No.4055191

I like Freud. He was fedora as fuck before it was cool (he forbade his wife from practising religion in their house as soon as they married and was a productive rational pragmatic scientist 300k starting looking at eels' cunts and such all day) and then proceeded to suck half of Bolivia up his magnificent schnoz while dreaming up a grand theory of all human behaviour being explained as perversity.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 23:55:03 2013 No.4055231 >>4053748 It's fun to watch an insane man talk passionately about how he talks to aliens and they are coming to steal our toe nails but, if that does actually happen we shouldn't say he is the father of intergalactic communication.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 23 23:57:03 2013 No.4055235 >>4055231 How are you making this about Jung?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 00:04:03 2013 No.4055254 >>4054236 PINK FREUD LOL

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 00:26:03 2013 No.4055284 >>4054578 this

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 00:39:03 2013 No.4055299 I wanna fuck your mom.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 00:41:03 2013 No.4055301 Austrians never do anything wrong.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 05:31:03 2013 No.4055569 >>4053662 >got most of his ideas from his imaginary friends >had sex with most if not all of his female patients, pretty inappropriate how can you take that guy seriously. i mean freud was a nutball but jung was way way out there

>>	Regular Ordinary Neckbeard Sat Aug 24 06:09:03 2013 No.4055594 File: 885 KB, 250x144, 1377279524867.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4053579 so you're saying your father fucked your mom because he wanted to fuck his mom and kill his father?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:06:03 2013 No.4056330 >ctrl+f: Wilhelm Reich >...

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:19:04 2013 No.4056350 >>4053579 I don't see why people get so uppity when people challenge some of Freud's nonsense. Being this devoted to Freud would be like refusing to read any biology textbook published after On the Origin of Species.

Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:31:03 2013 No.4056369

>>4056350
Most people refuting Freud are usually wrong about what they think they're refuting.

"Look everyone, I'm refuting X, which is Freud's theory."
X is rarely if ever Freud's theory.

Nobody ever study Freud anymore and so the only things people know are fragmentary part of his development theory and some structural hypothesis.

They won't know that, in "The Interpretation of Dream", Freud correctly suggested that psychic determinism was so all encompassing that one couldn't actually choose a random number. It had to be determined by that current web of association in the mind.

This seems accurate as far as current research subject.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:32:03 2013 No.4056372 >>4056369 > "current research subject" I mean suggests.

Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:50:04 2013 No.4056400

Freud believed that human civilization was an abnormality and from his views grew the current philosophy of hedonism in modern marxist philosophy. We should let civilization to fall and enjoy fucking until we turn to nothing more than regular animals? Uh, no. Freud was one of the worst things to happen in our times.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:51:04 2013 No.4056402 >>4056400 >We should let civilization to fall and enjoy fucking until we turn to nothing more than regular animals? yes

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:53:04 2013 No.4056403 File: 24 KB, 240x320, absolutely disgusting.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4056402

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 14:57:03 2013 No.4056417 >>4056400 i find civilisation really weird aswell i feel like it shouldnt exist freud > god

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 15:05:03 2013 No.4056435 >>4056369 Well, I mean, that's why you just ignore idiots no matter what they say, whether they defend ro criticize him. Freud was a key figure in the advancement of psychological research, but he was also a product of his time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 15:08:04 2013 No.4056442 >>4054145 Please explain this symbolic exchange better. I study Foucault and Agamben and you've got me interested when you talked about biopolitics I have a base of Freud and a little of Lacan, so people go slow

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 15:14:04 2013 No.4056458 >>4056442 And expanding: only by transgressing the society of total order (into the limits it allows) we'd be able to attain pleasure? And how does the concept of the objet petit a relate to it?

Anonymous Sat Aug 24 15:15:04 2013 No.4056460

>>4056400
well, you can't really say it isn't
humans have been around for millions of years
our species specifically for like 200,000
civilization has been around maybe 15,000 at the most

also, what is it with people being really fucking moronic about the whole "we're not animals" shit? it's really fucking frustrating because it's really unscientific, and it's sorta bullshit, because plenty of animals have monogamy, plenty of people fuck a lot of other people, and really the only thing that separates us is language.

people need to calm the hell down

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 15:18:03 2013 No.4056465 File: 10 KB, 224x224, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >1993 + 20 >not being a Jungian Plebeian disgusting if you ask me.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 15:24:03 2013 No.4056477 >>4056460 >people need to calm the hell down >calm the hell down >calm >hell Oh the irony.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 16:13:03 2013 No.4056577 >>4056460 >our species specifically for like 200,000 Technically not true. Google population bottleneck. >the whole "we're not animals" shit >the thing that separates us is language. Exactly. Which part of that are you having problems grasping?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 17:07:03 2013 No.4056686 I cant get over people taking him seriously after reading his work. Even if you didnt know that most of his theories have been disproven, its just too whacky, like ancient aliens kind of stuff.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 24 18:08:03 2013 No.4056823 File: 260 KB, 800x540, O.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 01:08:04 2013 No.4057576 >>4056460 >only thing that separates humans from animals is rationality >that's all!

Anonymous Sun Aug 25 01:33:05 2013 No.4057613

>>4055569
where he got his ideas and what he did in his spare time is a whole other conversation. for now you should be strictly concerned with his ideas and teachings. then again that should be obvious and you're probably just a troll. or at least hopefully you are.

Anonymous Sun Aug 25 01:36:05 2013 No.4057619

>>4056686
Well sure it's wacky but so is Nietzsche. The thing is that his work was revolutionary and like most revolutions it went too far but that doesn't mean that it's all useless. Newton was into alot of shit that hasn't held up so well over time either but we don't disregard everything on that basis. And just because the Newtonian paradigm hasn't held up to the innovative work of his successors doesn't mean that his work didn't pave the way for later breakthroughs..

Anyway, if for nothing more than his influence in the arts he is worthy of serious praise.. but really, you have to consider his work in the context it was written; it might be wacky (as new ideas are) but it shouldn't be hard to see why it was taken seriously.

Anonymous Sun Aug 25 01:36:05 2013 No.4057620

>>4057619
Also, people always get hung up on the theories of his that were disproven (most of them, and particularly the more specific ones) but fail to aknowledge that the central shifts in thought or ideas he introduced are still relevant and haven't been disproved: the idea of an unconscious aspect of the psyche, repressed drives, psychoanalysis, the idea that sex and violence are important/basic elements of human nature.
At least that's the way I see it though admittedly I'm not too well versed in his work.

Anonymous Sun Aug 25 01:51:05 2013 No.4057635

>>4056460
>well, you can't really say it isn't
Yes you can because by calling it an abnormality in this way he was saying that it was wrong/bad and needed to be abolished. I say civilization is not an abnormality in this sense. You seem to have interpreted this apart from the context and intended meaning. Sure, I suppose you can't say it isn't an abnormality in the sense that human civilization is not the norm and therefore abnormal, but human civilization did evolve naturally through the course of events which happened (the normal course of events) so in that sense it is normal. It is normal because human civilization is what happens in this universe. In this universe it would be abnormal for it not to happen then, no?

>saying "we're not animals" is moronic
depends on what the person means by animal.
If they mean in a biological sense then they'd be wrong but they probably don't so then it would be your fault for misinterpreting them.. It seems you have an unconscious desire to assume the most moronic interpretation of another's words to be the correct one, presumably to the luxury of your then inflated ego. What would Freud say?...

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 01:54:04 2013 No.4057637 >>4057635 freud was smart you are not kill yourself

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 02:13:06 2013 No.4057676 >>4053579 >You want to fuck your mom, get over it. You haven't read Freud.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 08:20:57 2013 No.4058167 >>4056400 >We should let civilization to fall and enjoy fucking until we turn to nothing more than regular animals? So you haven't read Freud.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 08:21:57 2013 No.4058170 >>4057676 >>4058167 exposing cunts mind

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 12:02:57 2013 No.4058620 >>4053920 Some of us don't like the taste of anus.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 12:06:57 2013 No.4058627 >>4053920 i would partake in more homosexuality but i'm always too paranoid about aids

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 12:11:56 2013 No.4058635 >>4058627 This too. My homosexual friends are extremely promiscuous.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 12:26:56 2013 No.4058669 >>4054127 They aren't the same idea, so who cares? What's your point?

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 12:30:56 2013 No.4058675 >>4058635 >My homosexual friends are extremely promiscuous. Ergo, you all gay people have to be promiscuous?

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 12:32:57 2013 No.4058683 >>4053579 And what i hate more than psuedo-intellectual fedoras who constantly shit on Freud are people advocating Freud without ever having the decency to read or understand his work.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 16:25:57 2013 No.4059140 so i should apply plato's tripartite soul to everything i do and if i don't im just a repressing faggot yea ok brb fucking my mom gonna get over it i can't stand any more ambivalence

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 16:28:57 2013 No.4059149 To take Freud seriously in 2013 is to have little to no understanding of modern psychology. Much of Freud's work is merely conjecture.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 16:37:56 2013 No.4059175 >>4059140 >plato >freud Pick one.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 16:40:57 2013 No.4059183 >>4058675 >Ergo, you all gay people have to be promiscuous? That's not what he said, you fucking tard.

>>	Anonymous Sun Aug 25 17:50:56 2013 No.4059353 File: 15 KB, 480x360, 0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I suppose someone on here has the picture with Nietzsche that say something along the lines of "so edgy, dementia, teenagers, blah blah blah"

Anonymous Mon Aug 26 06:47:41 2013 No.4060788
File: 36 KB, 334x500, The_Discovery_of_the_Unconscious.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4053957

>nothing about the unconscious in the Vedas
>nothing about the unconscious in Hegel
>nothing about the unconscious in Feuerbach
>nothing about the unconscious in Eduard von Hartmann

The moment Freudians stop being involved with their little personality cult, I'll start taking them seriously.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 06:51:41 2013 No.4060796 >>4059149 I imagine the person who typed this also believes eating carbs past 5PM is what makes you fat.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 06:55:40 2013 No.4060802 >>4060796 I imagine that you are a fucking retard.

Anonymous Mon Aug 26 07:12:40 2013 No.4060821

>>4060796
>I imagine the person who typed this also believes eating carbs past 5PM is what makes you fat.
To be honest, if you wake up at 1PM and stop eating at 5PM, you'll probably become thin very quickly. (Unless you spend those four legal hours in an all-you-can-eat buffet.)

Anonymous Mon Aug 26 07:52:40 2013 No.4060858

>>4057619
>>4057620
Of course hes been important for the development of psychology and he should be studied, but what I mean is that some people take his stuff too seriously, for example Argentinians which are still very influenced by it, and I find that approach quite outdated.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 07:53:40 2013 No.4060859 >>4053907 Am I not myself the subject of sexuality? Also ad hominem question - do you fuck often?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:01:40 2013 No.4060868 >>4053579 >You want to fuck your mom, get over it. I'm actually one of the few guys that flat out admitted that not once but thrice. My mom was fucking gorgeous. Freudsy was still bolocks

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:08:41 2013 No.4060877 >>4054154 >implying not Reich > all

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:09:40 2013 No.4060883 Austrian philosopher power rankings: 1. Wittgenstein 2. Viktor Frankl 3. Karl Popper 4. Jung 9001. Freud

Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:10:40 2013 No.4060886

>>4053810
>You've never wanted to fuck someone you weren't attracted to while drunk?
not him but no. attraction is what makes me want to fuck someone. it's also not socially inacceptable around all circles and in all places to make such remarks. I've complimented male friends for their looks before. they still don't cause me erections or sexual attractions. it's not all social conditioning

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:13:40 2013 No.4060891 >>4053833 >"would you stop doing something that causes you a neutral, merely functional stimulation just by the fact that you find no great enjoyment in it" yeah

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:17:40 2013 No.4060901 >>4060868 pics

Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:17:40 2013 No.4060905

>>4053842
>The sensation is surely the same
The sensation of an asshole wrapped around your dick is objectively different to that of a vagina and those two sensations are different from the one caused by a plastic vagina. Plus, the localized sensation in the erogenous zone might be identical (lets say your dick inside a male's asshole or a female one might be identical) but the chemical reaction in the brain (and therefore the rest of the pleasure) might be entirely different if you are aware of their sex. That needs not be social conditioning. Biology could cause exactly the same by its own means

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:21:40 2013 No.4060907 >>4053940 >Why is everyone presuming that his entire Psychoanalytical system revolved around the Oedipal-complex? that's not happening. You are the one presuming

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:24:40 2013 No.4060918 >>4054013 It could be called "Look an' dull us" and we could call each other lookies and dullies while we wear anabeads and sip champagne out of each other's cocks

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:35:41 2013 No.4060947 >>4060821 >implying I can't easily fit 3000kcal in a 4 hour window

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:37:41 2013 No.4060952 >no Adler Do you people even Will to Power?

>>	sage Mon Aug 26 08:39:40 2013 No.4060954 >>4060886 >implying you don't have homosexual thoughts going back to childhood friends or daddy or siblings and that you haven't just been conditioning yourself over a lifetime

sage Mon Aug 26 08:43:41 2013 No.4060961

>>4060858
outdated in our postpostmodern culture and discourse, maybe, but not in places that aren't feeling the numbing and opiate-like effects of pharmaceuticals and tvs (making analysis impossible-- with all these self-assured "ADHD" [and so from the start hopeless- because assured that they're hopeless] kiddos today-- like probably you yourself, you faggot) and but only ever the other excesses of globalization (i.e. only the bad excesses like hunger and c)

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:45:41 2013 No.4060965 >>4060954 well yeah, that was implied

Anonymous Mon Aug 26 08:48:40 2013 No.4060972

I've read a bit of Freud and didn't come away with much of use. the prose (in translation) was excellent, really engaging, but the ideas were shaky. That said their are things that have stuck with me, perhaps more than I'd care to admit: sublimation, the id/ego/superego thing. Eros and thanatos etc. Yes it is mumbo jumbo but concepts are not eternal truths they are temporary formations, tools. Jung taught me that and he was more up my street. The thing is it does not all boil down to sex and Freud really does think it all boils down to sex. Jung had a clearer view of things - better appreciation of religious impulses and the nature of human irrationality. He wasn't as scared as Freud.

Freud is worth reading though and anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 15:31:42 2013 No.4061726 >>4060961 Not really, is not about our society and culture, its about his ideas being purely pseudo-scientific conjectures. By the way you sound like the very self-assured ADHD kiddos you mention.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 26 15:35:41 2013 No.4061733 >>4053833 >complete with a lantern jaw and bathed in Creed Aventus lol'd at creed aventus

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature