I tried to create a link but couldn't do it because I think that I would probably need a mouse, to save it to my device.However, I don't know if anyone would wish to look at my thread again anyway. It is only 4 pages long, but for anyone who is interested it is called 'Sigmund Freud: The Great Philosophical Adventure.' I am hoping that your own thread is successful, and it may go further than mine did because there are a number of new members to the forum.

@Jack Cummins
It's a very good thread. Hopefully someone can link it for further discussion on this thread.

What's your take thoughts on the totem and the taboo?

What insights do you take from that book?

I read 'Totem and Taboo' a long time ago. I am about to log out because it is late at night where I am, but I will send you a further reply tomorrow.

@Jack Cummins
Cheers!

@Wayfarer
In freuds later work he talks about telepathy.

In the modern day of science this is taboo. Witness the treatment of Rupert sheldrake.

In freuds later work he talks about telepathy. — Protagoras

Got a reference for that? He was an extreme sceptic about paranormal to my knowledge.

I am just following up the discussion about 'Totem and Taboo' briefly. I read the book a long time ago on a religious studies module. My understanding of the book was that it examines the way in which the taboos are projected onto the father, and onto leaders. It also explores the nature of guilt, especially in relation to the development of neurotiism.

I found the analysis of guilt in relation to the way people develop anxiety very interesting, but, personally, I think that there have been a lot of developments in psychology since the time of the book, and I find Jung's ideas on religion to have more substance than Freud. I think that Freud opened up areas of thought which have been developed much further.

The one aspect of Freud's thinking which I feel is not paid enough attention outside of psychotherapy is that of projection. I think that is because we all do in so many ways, and it can be a blindspot in social interaction. We see the faults in others, failing to see that this fault may lie within ourselves. It is hard to see our own faults and it is in connection with this need for self analysis that anyone training in psychotherapy is expected to undertake personal therapy. The nature of projection has been taken up further by later psychodynamic thinkers, especially Melanie Klein. It is an aspect of psychotherapy but I do think that the concept is worth thinking about in philosophy too, because projection occurs as a subconscious aspect of life and, it may often occur in the exploration and exchange of ideas.

@Wayfarer
Freuds book "new introduction to psychoanalysis" is seven essays. One of the essays contains talk about telepathy. It's free online.

@Wayfarer
The second Essay of that collection is called "dreams and the occult".

Thanks, hadn't heard of it.

@Jack Cummins
What about jung on religion do you find beneficial?

Projection is a very interesting concept,but I think it's used incorrectly.

Guilt,taboo,anxiety and the "super ego" are interesting pointers in freuds thought.

What about Klein do you find instructive?

I really like Jaques lacans analysis that the unconscious is structured like a language.

@Kasperanza
When you say freud wasn't scientific,could you elucidate?

Because his ideas were obviously based on and backed by extensive hands on clinical practice with real clients.

I think that Klein's discussion of the processes of projective identification, as well as her idea of the depressive and schizoid position are important. Some people experience clinical depression or mental illnesses of a schizoid nature, but Klein sees the positions as being central to humans. However, this area is more about psychology than philosophy.

I have a thread on 'Jung's Ideas on God' if you are interested in looking at it, and it is only from a couple of months ago. I have not read very much of Lacan.

I also think that Freud is the one of the great thinker and philosopher in history with all the reasons already mentioned here. But he is neglected and forgotten largely by the modern contemporary people for the reason that he emphasises on sexuality for the important factors in explanation on human life and actions. People tend to look down sexuality or any talk about sexuality as cheap and low from the cultural, political, religious, educational and moral shackles on their lives. It is kind a chip on the shoulder of the people.

@Corvus
I must say that I do find freuds emphasis on sexuality incorrect.

But his notion of libido if interpreted as desire makes his thinking much more accurate.

I read somewhere that freud said people understand his theories too crudely.

And maybe he adjusted his thinking on literal sexuality as he progressed.

For me freud has many mistakes in his thinking,but he gets a lot of the basics correct.

With his mistakes I reinterpret his literal meanings to accord with my own experiences.

My saying freud is the most important thinker to grapple with is because he is right in so many things,yet wrong in a lot of things as well.

But he,unlike most thinkers,addresses the most important issues in a practical realist way.

Fair enough. I myself was totally oblivious on Freud for years since I read his book on Dreams. But this thread made me to add Freud in the Re-reading list.

@Corvus
His book Totem and taboo,
And his new introduction to psychoanalysis are both extremely good.
Freud wrote a lot of stuff!
I think a lot of people don't engage with freud sometimes for the reasons you mentioned,but people should at least know the crux of his basic stuff and the crux of his cultural writings.

@Jack Cummins
What you say about klein is very interesting. I think a lot of "sane" people experience a schizoid anxious type of awareness and project "masked" personalities.

What's your reading of the oedipus complex?

The Oedipus complex is a complex and questionable idea. It has a basis in the mythical ideas of 'Oedipus Rex', but it is so hard to know on what level we can apply it to humanity. I don't know where we start to qualify it. This may be one of the problems arising in Freud's philosophy. He makes sweeping claims, which are so difficult to verify.

@Jack Cummins
I don't believe the oedipus complex literally,and I believe freud,as on many concepts,was too dogmatic.

With that said,and this is why I really enjoy reading his ideas,there is a related reality to what he was trying to describe.

My take is that he wrongly interpreted the phenomenon of the ambivalence of people towards authority figures.
Nothing to do with sexuality really,but power.

With all of freuds stuff I verify with my personal experience.

Derrida's interest in Freud has not been mentioned yet. I found this when googled Derrida + Freud:

"There is no way to overlook the complicity between Psychoanalysis and the metaphysical tradition of the presence in the substantiation of its metapsychological instances. Many Freudian concepts fall within the logocentric repression system that are organized in an exclusion of the body of the written trace and are constructed supported by internal-external and subjective-objective oppositions, among others. However, the interest of Derrida is not focused on the 'great Freudian conceptuality', although he admits that this conceptuality has been necessary to break with Psychology in a given context of the history of sciences. The great machines such as 'self', 'ideal self', 'id', 'superego', states Derrida, are nothing but "provisional weapons, rhetorical utensils assembled against a philosophy of consciousness, of the transparent and fully responsible intentionality" (Derrida & Roudinesco, 2004, p. 207)."

Claudia Braga Andrade: Derrida's writing: Notes on the Freudian model of language

https://www.scielo.br/j/pusp/a/rgk6NQkYL9D8DDccKGw6yWR/?lang=en

@waarala
It seems a lot of continental philosophers are interested in freud,whether affirmative or critical.

My interest is that his thinking is important to critique as of all the cultural thinkers who wrote,his ideas encompass
culture most fully and existentially.

For sure freud was a bourgeois propagandist and Elitist,but his influence is palpable through politics,culture and advertising,via the use of his work by his nephew Edward Bernays and others who updated and used these principles.

And in truth freud was not at all the discoverer of this type of psychology,but he was a cipher used to publicise this method.

The fact his work is neglected in mainstream culture nowadays is a testament that the powers that be don't want this narrative back out in the open again.Because these powers and the media use his psychological principles extensively.
@Joshs You may have some useful comments on this subject area.

Just finished reading freuds "new introductory lectures on psychoanalysis".

An excellent summary of freuds work.

All freuds value as a thinker and writer are on display here.
His value as a social critic is exceptional.

In the area of sexuality and women freud is a procrustean clown. A real idiot.

But as a critic of organised religion and culture he is way better than nietzsche and marx.

But freud the myth maker,the illusionist,the propagandist is on full display reading between his lines.

One must psychoanalyse the psychoanalyst...

Just finished "totem and taboo".

A very interesting four essays in this book. Freuds obsession with his concept of the oedipus complex is on full display here.

He spends most of the book trying to prove that religion,culture,history and politics are all the result of the oedipus complex and a murder of a dictatorial father by his sons to gain access to his women!

His research of anthropologists like frazer illustrates how racist,clueless and dirty minded those old academics were in studying other cultures.

Essay 3 is a corker. A great piece of psychology,though once again used as propoganda.

Every criticism freud has of indigenous tribes and neurotics also applies to freud!

Freud really knew his neurotics! That's because he was one!

Next up; moses and monotheism. Promises to be a great read. Was freuds last cultural work before he died.

@Jack Cummins

Just Read "Moses and monotheism".

A tremendous read. The best book by freud I've read so far.

Shows how Judaism emphasises intellectuality,and what freud thinks have been and are the benefits of Jewish monotheism.

He claims the origin of religion,Law and modern culture is from the murder of a despotic father and regicide,and the subsequent guilt.

Freuds various psychological theories are cheekily used to explain the progression of history and culture.

The thing about this book is not the conclusions but the avenues for exploration and elucidation.