>At some point in a boy's life, he will feel a strong pull towards having sex with his own mother.>At some point in a girl's life, she will feel a strong pull towards having sex with her own father.>My source? It came to me in a dream.
Freud was a deranged coomer only notable for the fact that he got the ball rolling for future sensible people who cleaned up his schizo ramblings.
>If you constrain healthy sexual impulses, the libido will regress into an earlier stage of development in which it will find its long sought satisfaction. One such stage is the oral stage in which the child is wholly dependent on the mother for pleasure.It makes more sense than people care to admit.
>>25229993pic unrel
>>25229978i'm not saying it's *not* all ultra-speculative and wacky, but it's easier to see where he's coming from when you think that, as a baby, your whole life is about receiving pleasure and comfort from your mother's body. you're joined in a kind of blissful physical wholeness. you open your mouth in hunger and the next moment a juicy teat is coupled to it; you cry out in distress and the next moment you're enclosed in warm familiar arms. freud thinks that your genital sexuality, when it first develops, aims to satisfy itself using that same maternal source. but, if you're a boy, the father intervenes and says, in effect, hands off, she's mine: then you develop a sense of the abstract, nonphysical power of 'the law', of social authority. boys overcome this by thinking, 'one day i will become like my dad and have a woman of my own who will provide me with the total untroubled bliss i knew before i entered into society with its rules and identities'. girls don't need the intervention of the father to stand between them and genital fulfillment via the mother since they lack a penis - so they resign themselves to taking up the position of the mother, and fantasise about giving birth to a son who will represent for them the phallic pleasure they themselves can't enjoy.
>>25229978I had the opposite of this. I vividly remember being like six and hearing "every biy marries his mother" and I literally thought "guess im not getting married then".
>>25229993Freud was on the track of exposing the Venetian Epsteins but sold out and covered for their crimes. Jung was a real one.
I think the sex drive/libido thing makes a lot more sense when it's more broadly defined as "eros", or as the desire for love, for pleasure, to unite, integrate, create etc. I do remember having thoughts that could absolutely be seen as sexual long before I had any conception of what sex even was, which is almost a horrifying thought. A lot of Freud, to me, makes sense, but only if you're totally honest with yourself.
>At some point in a boy's life, he will feel...>At some point in a boy's life, he will eel...>At some point in an eel's life...>eel...>EEL!!!
>>25230033>dubs confirmyeah, I'll probably fake my own death if I ever end up with a woman like my mom.
This is one of the worst brainworms ever put into society. Just a complete fabrication. Maybe you can find an ounce of truth to it if you go really abstract like some anons here are trying. But this is a sick idea that has infected the public consciousness.
>>25229978>all of psychology stems from a jew pervert (redundant) that wanted to fuck his mother>only replicable thing in the entire field of psychology is IQ which is the ultimate taboogrim
>>25230300Funny you say this, I finished my first Freud book recently and while thinking about it today, was hit with a spell of something I can only think of as "existential psychosis", the most I've ever felt disconnected from reality without drugs. I think what makes it sickening is how likely it all is to be the truth.
>>25230300You're not wrong. Although it's true that children (not just boys) inevitably compete with their fathers for their mother's attention. And that fathers can feel resentful and alienated because their wives have a new and higher priority in life.I remember a very specific encounter with my own father when I was very young. He came home drunk one evening and, finding me alone in the kitchen, embarked on a slurring, low-voiced invective that my mother (in the next room) wouldn't hear. The only parts that I recall were the sour, repeated accusations that I was "Mummy's pet."
>>25230337Was he wrong?
>>25230257>>25230330Reading Freud made me feel gross. He uses some very crafty rhetorical slight of hands which if you catch on to them feels he's trying to force something into your brain.
>>25230346He probably had a point. Children like to monopolise their mother's attention.Even a stopped clock like my father is right twice a day ...
>>25230380Raising a son is the most cucked shit you can possibly do. They have been all up in your wife's pussy and you feed, clothe, and nurture them. A real man would have stomped the little bastard to death as soon as he could.
>>25230404The whole point of parenthood is that you sponsor someone else to succeed you, at immense personal cost.No, I don't understand it either. It's probably just vanity.
>>25230348I did like Civilization And Its Discontents and to a lesser degree, Beyond The Pleasure Principle but I probably will treat other works of his with a hermeneutic of suspicion, which is sort of like applying Freud to Freud, kind of.
>>25229993>he got the ball rollinghow? for example the passive intellect was discussed by thomas. freud contributed the heresy that unnatural concupiscence begins in the passive intellect and is only repressed from the active intellect by habit. paul says that men are given over to unnatural concupiscence when they lie and say God doesnt exist, then unnatural concupiscence moves from an active choice to a habit and into the passive intellect
>>25230337>The only parts that I recall were the sour, repeated accusations that I was "Mummy's pet."maybe he was calling you a mommas boi and saying you need to leave the kitchen and go to the garage
>>25230449Doubtful. I was 3 years old and we didn't have a garage.
>>25230027Freud seems to me like a sophist and your reasoning strikes me as nonsense. That being said, I would have no problem if this woman were to press my face against her warm breasts, stroke my hair, and tell me in a soothing voice that everything will be alright.
>>25230459maybe your dad needed your tiny fingers because he had a kia
>>25229978>/lit/ thread>thrice weekly elementary 101 survey course thinker thread>99 posts by people who clearly did not read the book(s) or even a summary of the book(s)>11 posts by pseudo-religious communist homosexuals who did read the book(s), but only want to discuss it as it applies to communism or their gay boyfriend>2-3 posts by people who clearly did read and understand the book, but where this is only evident in their 5 word throwaway shitpost to make it know to the rest that they are in fact, very smart while offering nothing of valueGood.Now make a Hobbes thread about not signing the social contract.
>>25230326>all of psychology stems from a jew pervert (redundant) that wanted to fuck his motherThis is like arguing all of geometry stems from a murder cult. Except actually more wrong because basically nothing Freud ever said is still fucking used in modern psychology.
>>25230478Why fight against the current, young fish?
>>25229993Jung was a better ethicist than psychologist.
>>25230483Like it matters what is still used in that made up vibe field.
>>25230493If you don't even know what's used in the field, but are still hostile to it, you're the one acting out on vibes.
Freud didn't say either of those things though.
>>25230507If you think that Psychology has legitimacy at all as a scientific field of study you are congenitally retarded and do not qualify to post on a 18+ only website.
>>25230483what about Rogers, Maslow, Skinner, etc?
>>25230478Me? I'm here for the culture.
>>25230513>If you think that Psychology has legitimacy at all as a scientific field of study you are congenitally retardedNice self-own.
>>25230487because there are people in here ITVT who have been posting>he was jew wants fuck mom things i don't no about are gay, and dare i say NIGGERS!in freud threads for years and have never read one of his very short papers which would allow them to criticize him properly or at least uphold the appearance of doing so as you really only need maybe 20 pages of anything he ever wrote to get an intuitive sense of his system.no one new is coming here and putting up with this captcha system and the website down 50% of the timethe same people post every day in the same hobbes/freud/jung/land/etc unofficial generals saying the same things never having read 20 pages worth.
>>25229993Fpbp
>>25230764eh, I try to start threads on lesser known thinkers and historians but they get 3 replies max.
>>25230772Because those whos are boring
>>25229978this nigga self-snitchin' smdh
>>25230764>jew wants fuck momsome people were dumb enough to see something bizarre and assume that it must be scientific, but the true value of freud was to give the world a view into the jewish psyche. turns out there are some "people" to which what would be unnatural concupiscence to a white man is natural
>>25230773not really. you're just a readlet
>>25230802Sub 115 IQ
>>25230802You're an ape. Unironically.You don't know anything about anything, you couldn't understand even if it was spelled out to you. You just go with vibes.Like an ape.
Not my own mother, other people's mothers
>>25230886This. But I think it's due to being raised by a single mother and wanting the attention and trust of an older woman. I know consider ultimate trust and attention to be sex with MILFs
>>25230877jews will spend the rest of the time jews exist apologizing for freud and marx as well as caiaphas
>>25229978who would actually be into his own mother haha
>>25232022Me.But only because she was a really attractive and loving woman.I don't understand the guys who jerk it to their ugly/old/fat/evil looking mothers.
>>25229993/threadBest part is that Jung does in fact feel like a genuine evolution of Freud's theories without the "everything is sex" dogma. The latter wanted to close everything on his first findings, but the former just went for blowing it open and expanding it in any direction he possibly could, within the limits of what's the theory of the unconscoius about, anyways.
>>25230513Your extreme emotional reaction is indicative of a harmful projection. See a psychiatrist.
>im smart and i belong here!
>>25232158He's right, but also extremely narrow-minded at the same time.Psychology isn't what you would consider entirely empirical or "objective" science, but that's the right approach because you are dealing with subjective elements. Subjectivity is a psychic fact, simply put, the second you deny its influence, you aren't doing psychology properly anymore.
>>25229993>Freud was a deranged coomer That's rich when Jung was a serial adulterer who used his therapies as an excuse for sex.
>>25232174He had inferior Feeling and didn't notice half of the time until it was too late.Don't look at me like that, it's what you can actually read from him.
>>25232174>Freud spent a lot of time thinking and talking about sex.>Jung spent a lot of time having sex.>Somehow Jung is the coomer.
>>25230027The joke remains that by reading too hard into what Freud writes, once constructs a chicken out of maybe one imaginary feather. >comfort from your mother's bodySee? Freuds argument stops there. Its why his writing has survived. Then a lot of readers get confused, because hw will then ramble on about the symbols, and they will think the argument is literal. >>25232063>everything is sexOnly at a symbolic level where its more of a downstream issue., and prudes take offense at that.
>>25232388>Only at a symbolic level And it's incomplete even at that level.Jung was right about generalizing the libido as "psychic energy" and see a multitude of symbols instead that aren't necessarily connected to forgotten/repressed contents of the personal unconscious, or necessarily associated to an "external object".His biggest power move, other than the collective unconscious, was to understand the existence of introversion. Nowadays we use the term in the most incorrect and downright disparaging way, which is why current psychology is a strange mix of pseudo-neurobiology and straight just uncontrolled projection.
>>25232594>Jung was right about generalizing the libido as "psychic energy" and see a multitude of symbols instead that aren't necessarily connected to forgotten/repressed contents of the personal unconsciousiirc Freud also broadened his definition of libido to something like that around Beyond the Pleasure Principle.
>>25232655Freud had genuinely grasped at something, but we could say it was much bigger than he thought.Really feels like that if the two could stick together, psychology would have been actually the most advanced field of them all, and we wouldn't need to deal with several labels to cope with the gap left from rejecting these approaches.
>>25232168You're wrong, and Jung proved it over 40 years of psychotherapy. This is what gave rise to his theory of Archetypes.The consistent correlations in the dreams and fantasies of his patients led to his recognition of the Archetypes, which can be directly experienced by anybody. His approach was empirical. The Archetypes are objective, not subjective.
>>25232693I believe the word you are looking for is "trans-subjective". The archetype is not objective per se because it does not exist as an outer object, it can only be inferred by correlation with dreams, mythological symbolism and whatnot.
>>25232714In that case, the mind itself is not objective. And yet I'm pretty sure everybody's got one.
>>25232737He believed the psyche is (in ideal conditions) equally shaped by outer perceptions, inner facts, and ultimately trans-subjective patterns called "Archetypes".With the caveat that actually, the psyche does not have pure unfiltered access to either the external world nor the collective unconscious, so ultimately you only ever see the subjective image shaped by both sources.It gets weird because this position is obviously detached from natural science, but you could say the existence of the psyche itself is an objective fact for him.
