Comments on: Freud the chastened intellectualist

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 00:38:50 +0000

The most important idea in Freud’s work for our self-understanding is the unconscious: the fact that most of what goes on in our minds is opaque to us.

But that’s not something that’s unique or original to Freud: Paul of Tarsus had figured it out (“the good I would do, I do not”). Beyond that, he has a number of important ideas that help a lot in particular cases: narcissism and masochism are the two I’ve personally found most valuable. So too is the idea of sexual symbolism appearing in places where even the symbol-makers aren’t aware of it (such as the “Freudian slip”). Hard to name a single one of his ideas (beyond the unconscious itself) as standing above the rest, but together they add up to a very rich field of insight.

By: michael reidy

michael reidy — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:42:30 +0000

Amod:
What in your opinion is the major thing from Freud’s work that helps us understand ourselves better?

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:56:31 +0000

The striking thing about Freud is how widely he is read by everyone except scientists. He is dead in psychology and biology, but alive and well in literature and religious studies. Which suggests to me that your last question should not be read as rhetorical: what was he, indeed? The answer might be: an interpretive humanist who helped us understand ourselves better, while believing he was a natural scientist. Freud as scientist is closely parallel to Marx as revolutionary; Marx’s successors, against the man’s own intention, have done far better at interpreting the world than at changing it.

By: michael reidy

michael reidy — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:48:09 +0000

Count Sneaky:
If anyone’s scientific credibility is exploded it surely is Freud’s. He is at the moment a little to the shady side of Scientology. His cocaine usage is well documented cf. Thornton/The Freudian Fallacy who also points out that infantile sexuality without their being actual sex hormones is deeply daft. The literature is vast on his fabrications. Interestingly a little monograph by Alisdair MacIntyre called ‘The Unconscious’ was early in the day with a philosophical rebuttal.

If not the scientist which he promoted himself as, what was he?

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:42:56 +0000

Hi Count Sneaky – I would agree overall that Freud’s view is the most plausible of the three. It’s still a sad picture of human life if that’s the case – sadder than Xunzi’s, in a way, since the hope for a happy and harmonious life isn’t there.

By: Count Sneaky

Count Sneaky — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:47:10 +0000

I, also, tend to suspect this view is probably correct, but Xunzi’s view is , I think, only partially true and really minimizes or discounts circumstance. Augustine’s view is religious in nature and requires fundamentally flawed human nature to work. Freud relies on observation rather than theology and comes closer to modern views of individualism. Altogether, not views one can get enthusiastic about, but reality requires we look with clear eyes and master ourselves only.