Freud a psychopath? Certainly!

[knowledge_of_self]

I'm very interested in reading this book after it is translated to English. Because although I have always loved psychology, I never liked Freud.

Like Cuubex, I thought his theory Oedipus complex, and the whole incest issue was really flawed and I couldn't understand why he was so revered in his field. He sounded like a loony toon to me.

 

[Slow Motion Mary]

Is there any truth to the rumor that Freud was addicted to cocaine? If so, this might explain his obsession with explaining mental disorders in connection with sexual issues.

 

[EGVG]

I'm very interested in reading this book after it is translated to English. Because although I have always loved psychology, I never liked Freud.

Like Cuubex, I thought his theory Oedipus complex, and the whole incest issue was really flawed and I couldn't understand why he was so revered in his field. He sounded like a loony toon to me.

Oh! no english version yet? :(

 

[tykes]

I'm very interested in reading this book after it is translated to English. Because although I have always loved psychology, I never liked Freud.

Like Cuubex, I thought his theory Oedipus complex, and the whole incest issue was really flawed and I couldn't understand why he was so revered in his field. He sounded like a loony toon to me.

Oh! no english version yet? :(

Not yet, is available only french by the moment.

 

[Iron]

Sigmund Freud conflates sexual desire with love as do many of his successors such as Norman O. Brown, Wilhelm Reich and Herbert Marcuse.

Actually, as far as I can tell Wilhelm Reich is from a different ilk. I do not agree fully with his views on sexuality, but his observations of energy, how energetic fields of different persons interact, his emphasis in seeing narcissism and other behaviours as traits, being disease only when the behaviour is pervasive were very helpful to me in the context of the work.
And his view of sexuality was more like a pure, creative energy, different from Freud.

 

[shijing]

Actually, as far as I can tell Wilhelm Reich is from a different ilk. I do not agree fully with his views on sexuality, but his observations of energy, how energetic fields of different persons interact, his emphasis in seeing narcissism and other behaviours as traits, being disease only when the behaviour is pervasive were very helpful to me in the context of the work.
And his view of sexuality was more like a pure, creative energy, different from Freud.

My only exposure to Reich is from Saharasia, but from what I've seen there I tend to agree. I don't know if he has the whole picture or not, but I think at the very least it's safe to say he's quite different from Freud, and not pathological.

 

[Iron]

Actually, as far as I can tell Wilhelm Reich is from a different ilk. I do not agree fully with his views on sexuality, but his observations of energy, how energetic fields of different persons interact, his emphasis in seeing narcissism and other behaviours as traits, being disease only when the behaviour is pervasive were very helpful to me in the context of the work.
And his view of sexuality was more like a pure, creative energy, different from Freud.

My only exposure to Reich is from Saharasia, but from what I've seen there I tend to agree. I don't know if he has the whole picture or not, but I think at the very least it's safe to say he's quite different from Freud, and not pathological.

Im on a ongoing course with indirect students of him. If you want, I can post some field notes I have acquired so far.
Pretty interesting bits of information.

 

[go2]

Sigmund Freud conflates sexual desire with love as do many of his successors such as Norman O. Brown, Wilhelm Reich and Herbert Marcuse.

Actually, as far as I can tell Wilhelm Reich is from a different ilk. I do not agree fully with his views on sexuality, but his observations of energy, how energetic fields of different persons interact, his emphasis in seeing narcissism and other behaviours as traits, being disease only when the behaviour is pervasive were very helpful to me in the context of the work.
And his view of sexuality was more like a pure, creative energy, different from Freud.

Wilhelm Reich’s assertion that repressed sexuality is the source of neurosis is the psychoanalytic mechanism Dr. MacDonald argues was used by the Freudian psychoanalysts to undermine the family structure of Western Civilization resulting in the low investment parenting which today characterizes the increasingly illiterate American population. Reich is an advocate of unrestrained sexuality. We could say Wilhelm Reich’s legacy is sex, drugs, and rock-an-roll. Collapsing literacy and collapsing family life leave normal men and women vulnerable to predation by psychopaths and their deviant world views.

In 1933, psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) described the "phallic-narcissistic" personality type in terms that foreshadow the present-day definition: self-assured, arrogant, and disdainful.

Iron, how does “phallic-narcissism” help you understand the Work?

Reich’s definition and distinction of health or sickness of the human organism is based on the proper movement of energy in his organism, the energy that Freud called “Libido Energy” and Reich named “Orgone Energy.”

In order to explain certain phenomena that he was observing in children and in his patients, Freud had to hypothesize an existence of a psycho-sexual energy that flows in the body and gets concentrated in certain areas. The concentrated areas of this energy, Libido Energy, were considered to be Erogenous zones, such as mouth, anus and genitals. The investment of this energy on different areas is in relation to the developmental stage of the child. In the newborn this energy is mostly concentrated around the oral area, later between the ages of one and two, the investment of Libido Energy is mostly in the anal area and the sphincters and around age 3, Libido energy moves into the genital area. Freud hypothesized that this energy energizes instincts. Emotions get its power from instincts. As Freud’s disciples gradually moved away from this theory and elaborated endlessly on other aspects of his theories, such as the theory of conscious and unconscious and the theory of Id, Ego, Super Ego, Freud himself also moved away from his own Libido theory.

Reich contended that Libido theory, the theory of psychosexual energy, is the basic and central theory and understanding of the functioning of human organism depends on this theory.

Reich simply appropriates Freud’s discarded Libido theory and calls it Orgone Energy. What is Wilhelm Reich’s fixation on sexuality as the primary driving force of man? Perhaps, he projects his own pathology onto normal humanity.

I read Wilhelm Reich’s Listen Little Man. The ranting appears to be that of a man full of rage and contempt for normal men who do not recognize the greatness of Wilhelm Reich. I read this book with morbid fascination, as the raging of a madman. I see no compassion or empathy for mankind, only self pity and fury. I suggest readers examine Listen Little Man for the taste of pathology. You might look for self-assured arrogance and disdain for normal men and women.

 

[Don Diego]

Is there any truth to the rumor that Freud was addicted to cocaine? If so, this might explain his obsession with explaining mental disorders in connection with sexual issues.

In 1884 freud obtain cocaine from army doctors;he write to his friend Fliess on June 12 1895:"I need a lot of cocaine..."
So a decenny of addiction at least,an many articles to justify his believes to this miraculous drug!

 

[Ellipse]

It appears that Freud is the chief liar and storyteller we have ever seen,and in this work completed with a very sharp understanding we can find such amount of clues to confirm actually that freud is one of them;
It would be too long(600 pages) and too hard to summerize because of my poor english and I apologize for that but here some links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Onfray
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA7nErVUwI0 unfortunatly not subtitled

From 54'40 he explained the process: he have really read books and letters from Freud (he started in 1973), instead of quoting what others have written, and so he discovered the true (this remind me someone else :)). It's incredible how the true can just be here and concelled.

 

[Chu]

Oh! no english version yet? :(

Not yet, is available only french by the moment.

But there are many more good books on the subject in English. For example:

Induced delusions: The psychopathy of Freudism

and

The Psychoanalytic Movement: The Cunning of Unreason

 

[Iron]

Wilhelm Reich’s assertion that repressed sexuality is the source of neurosis is the psychoanalytic mechanism Dr. MacDonald argues was used by the Freudian psychoanalysts to undermine the family structure of Western Civilization resulting in the low investment parenting which today characterizes the increasingly illiterate American population. Reich is an advocate of unrestrained sexuality. We could say Wilhelm Reich’s legacy is sex, drugs, and rock-an-roll. Collapsing literacy and collapsing family life leave normal men and women vulnerable to predation by psychopaths and their deviant world views.

Reich is not an advocate of unrestrained sexuality. This is incorrect. He saw, in the beggining of his practice with workers, that the sexually active ones had less maniac episodes and neuroses, compared with the ones who did not masturbate or had relations due to religion or other guilt inducing factor.
In further studies he started to say that beings have what he called a biological core , that emanates pure feelings and drives, sexuality being just one of those, he later started refering sexuality as the desire for conexion with another.

However the trouble starts due to the presence of the body armour phenom. Traumas of all kinds stiffen the musculature and stiffen the energy net, blocking and distorting primary energetic impulses.

In 1933, psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) described the "phallic-narcissistic" personality type in terms that foreshadow the present-day definition: self-assured, arrogant, and disdainful.

Iron, how does “phallic-narcissism” help you understand the Work?

Not sure about phalic narcissistic, because this term wasnt mentioned in my classes so far. What was mentioned and was helpful was the view of narcissism as a trait embebed in the body armour/psyche and nurtured by stagnant energy of past traumas. Healing the trauma cuts the energy suply and often some petty traits disappear. It was interesting to me because of EE, I was seeing it happen on me, was interesting to have a different explanation.

Reich’s definition and distinction of health or sickness of the human organism is based on the proper movement of energy in his organism, the energy that Freud called “Libido Energy” and Reich named “Orgone Energy.”

In order to explain certain phenomena that he was observing in children and in his patients, Freud had to hypothesize an existence of a psycho-sexual energy that flows in the body and gets concentrated in certain areas. The concentrated areas of this energy, Libido Energy, were considered to be Erogenous zones, such as mouth, anus and genitals. The investment of this energy on different areas is in relation to the developmental stage of the child. In the newborn this energy is mostly concentrated around the oral area, later between the ages of one and two, the investment of Libido Energy is mostly in the anal area and the sphincters and around age 3, Libido energy moves into the genital area. Freud hypothesized that this energy energizes instincts. Emotions get its power from instincts. As Freud’s disciples gradually moved away from this theory and elaborated endlessly on other aspects of his theories, such as the theory of conscious and unconscious and the theory of Id, Ego, Super Ego, Freud himself also moved away from his own Libido theory.

Reich contended that Libido theory, the theory of psychosexual energy, is the basic and central theory and understanding of the functioning of human organism depends on this theory.

Reich simply appropriates Freud’s discarded Libido theory and calls it Orgone Energy. What is Wilhelm Reich’s fixation on sexuality as the primary driving force of man? Perhaps, he projects his own pathology onto normal humanity.

Actually the experiments with orgone energy went further, as Reich wanted to see if this energy had physical appearance and properties. He and others like Rife, claim to have seen those blocks of energy in the form of shapeshifting particules. Reich called them bions. I cant verify so far the validity of those assertions, maybe I'll try to see in my lab those when I got the time.
Reich did experiment with box to accumulate orgone energy, and other devices that use this energy to dissipate clouds.
This last device, the cloudbuster, was what made Reich to get a free pass to jail, and the destruction of all his notes as being a health risk by the FDA.

I read Wilhelm Reich’s Listen Little Man. The ranting appears to be that of a man full of rage and contempt for normal men who do not recognize the greatness of Wilhelm Reich. I read this book with morbid fascination, as the raging of a madman. I see no compassion or empathy for mankind, only self pity and fury. I suggest readers examine Listen Little Man for the taste of pathology. You might look for self-assured arrogance and disdain for normal men and women.

It is claimed that Freud got jealous of Reich and tried to undermine his career. This is in the form of letters I think in Caracter Analysis. Not sure. In the meantime Im posting a link with some of the things I attempted to convey to you.
http://www.orgonelab.org/wrhistory.htm

So you are free to make your own conclusions.
I cant help but notice a certain flavor in your reply to me... a certain "righteousness" that you were absolutely right. You took references from wikipedia. How reliable can be wikipedia when we are talking about a person who was persecuted by the FDA and whose name is mentioned rarely in psychological schools. A man who is the father of bioenergetics by the way.

The very own bioenergetic breathing that we do on EE is linked to this man, since he was the teacher of Alexander Lowen.
Of course Laura modified to make it more efficient.

Anyway, I will not dispute with you the Listen Little Man, for I have not read it yet. You be right. However, not everyone reacts with grace of being persecuted.

 

[Hesper]

I read Wilhelm Reich’s Listen Little Man. The ranting appears to be that of a man full of rage and contempt for normal men who do not recognize the greatness of Wilhelm Reich. I read this book with morbid fascination, as the raging of a madman. I see no compassion or empathy for mankind, only self pity and fury. I suggest readers examine Listen Little Man for the taste of pathology. You might look for self-assured arrogance and disdain for normal men and women.

I am looking for self-assured arrogance and disdain, but I am finding a lot more nuance here in "Listen, Little Man!" I'm seeing a beleaguered psychologist practically begging people to wake up.

That is not new, isn’t it? Your liberators tell you that your suppressors are Wilhelms, Nikolaus, Pope Gregory the Twenty-eight, Morgan, Krupp or Ford. And your ‘liberators’ are called Mussolini, Napoleon, Hitler, and Stalin.
I tell you: Only you yourself can be your liberator!
...
The living [normal human being?], in its social and human interrelationship, is naively kindly and thus, under prevailing conditions, endangered. It assumes that the fellow human also follows the laws of the living and is kindly, helpful and giving. As long a. [sic] then is the emotional plague [pathological individual?], this natural basic attitude that of the healthy child or the primitive, becomes the greatest danger in the struggle for a rational order of life. For the plague individual also ascribes to his fellow beings the characteristics of his own thinking and acting. The kindly individual believes that all people are kindly and act accordingly. The plague individual believes that all people lie, swindle, steal and crave power. Clearly, then, the living is at a disadvantage and in danger. Where it gives to the plague individual it is sucked dry and then derided or betrayed; and where it trusts it is cheated.
...
You have no sense organ for the truly great man. His way of being his suffering, his longing, his raging, his fight for
you are alien to you. You cannot understand that there are men and women who are incapable of suppressing or
exploiting you, and who really want you to be free, real and honest.

It seems like he just didn't understand that the people who he helped, and who were being rounded up against him by pathological forces, were possibly soul-less. I see in this text that Wilhelm Reich was really a "good obvyatel" who understood their strengths and sensed their limitations, but believed he could appeal to "higher emotions" and forceful arguments in order to win support. But of course he was projecting. OSIT He does wander into condescension and arrogance though, and the text is so long! So I can see how you could think that he was a pathological.

In order to gain your favor, Little Man, in order to gain your useless friendship, the great man would have to adjust
himself to you, would have to talk the way you do, would have to adorn himself with your virtues. But if he had your
virtues, your language and your friendship, he would no longer be great and true and simple. The proof: your friends
who talked the way you wanted them to talk have never been great men.

True, he was no Gurdjieff, and didn't understand what was attacking him. He was probably angry and believed himself to be super-special because he was smart, and he didn't have Laura to tell him, and I'm paraphrasing, "Some people are just supposed to be kind, warm, and loving, and it's the warrior who protects them. It's that simple." But he was demonized and had his works destroyed, so without knowing much more I would have to say that he was seen as a danger by the control system. And it was because of his creativity that he was, so possibly he was just a normal person with issues?

Im on a ongoing course with indirect students of him. If you want, I can post some field notes I have acquired so far. Pretty interesting bits of information.

This would be nice, since his works were for the most part destroyed. Is it really so "Freudian" or is it more objective?

 

[Buddy]

I read Wilhelm Reich’s Listen Little Man. The ranting appears to be that of a man full of rage and contempt for normal men who do not recognize the greatness of Wilhelm Reich. I read this book with morbid fascination, as the raging of a madman. I see no compassion or empathy for mankind, only self pity and fury. I suggest readers examine Listen Little Man for the taste of pathology. You might look for self-assured arrogance and disdain for normal men and women.

I am looking for self-assured arrogance and disdain, but I am finding a lot more nuance here in "Listen, Little Man!" I'm seeing a beleaguered psychologist practically begging people to wake up.

Although I don't have the full picture of Wilhelm Reich, I agree with Iron and Hespen's view of "Listen Little Man".

To me, the 'little man' is the man with the teeny tiny Real self dominated by the programmed ego. He is the cannon fodder, clapper and supporter of political and societal psychopathology.

When he 'grows up', the little man will realize the contradictions and idiocy in his own behavior. For example, when he puts away the plow he uses to prepare the land to grow food to feed his family and others who can trade for his food to provide him with goods he couldn't acquire otherwise, except through begging, borrowing or stealing, to go off to war, bombing the land of another man in another part of the world.

Here's an example of 'little man' having excused his pathological support as 'my duty to society' and the question that naturally follows from this fallacy:

[quote author=http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=18405.msg173079#msg173079]
But then I ask: Why don't you do your duty in silence when a wise man tells you that you and you alone are responsible for what you do, or tries to persuade you not to beat your children, or pleads with you for the thousandth time to stop obeying dictators? What becomes of your duty, your innocent obedience, then? No, little man, when truth speaks, you don't listen. You listen only to bluster. And then you shout Hurrah! Hurrah! You're cowardly and cruel, little man; you have no sense of your true duty, which is to be a man and to preserve humanity. You imitate wise men so badly and bandits so well. Your movies and radio programs are full of murder.[/quote]

 

[anart]

So the free choice of EGVGs mother is still there, if she reads the book or not. Good to know.

Legolas, for what it's worth, I think your reaction is understandable. EGVG states that his mother is such a huge fan of Freud that she has his picture framed. It's not very externally considerate to tell someone that their hero is a psychopath. She's not asking for objective information on Freud, after all.

In a way, EGVG is determining the needs of his mother in this instance.

Now, from another point of view, EGVG is offering his mother another viewpoint by giving her a book that she may or may not choose to read. I suppose it all comes down to how it is done, EGVG's expectations and motivations, and the state of mind of his mother.

All in all, considering the way the book is written, according to Ailen, it will probably not do any harm, unless his mother is extremely identified with Freud, in which case, it might make her uncomfortable, and that will be an interesting lesson for EGVG.

Anyway, I just wanted to chime in that your initial reaction is understandable - and - as always, the devil is in the details, so we'll see.