Neue Folge der Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Psychoanalyse: Gesammelte Werke 17 Bde., 1 Reg.-Bd. u. 1 Nachtragsbd., Bd.15

by Sigmund Freud

=New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis

Genres: Psychology, Psychoanalysis, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Classics, Science, School

Hardcover

First published January 1, 1936

About the author

Dr. Sigismund Freud (later changed to Sigmund) was a neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, who created an entirely new approach to the understanding of the human personality. He is regarded as one of the most influential—and controversial—minds of the 20th century.

In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.

Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.

In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.

After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.

In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.

Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.

Reviews

[Orhan Pelinkovic · Rating 4 out of 5]

Treating mental disorders with words rather than physical substances or interventions.

Diagnosing mental disabilities by interpreting the unconscious rather than through sensory observations or various apparatus.

Treatment means no less than becoming aware of the cause and reasoning behind the disorder; making one conscious of the unconscious.

Some of the main battlegrounds that leave an everlasting impression on one's mental and emotional state are childhood, filial relationships, and sexuality.

This is how I understood Freud and his New Introduction Lectures on Psycho-Analysis.

I appreciate Freud's awareness of the limitations of his theories and methods which reminded of Darwin's similar recognition of the limitations of his own theories.

I found it interesting that the many novels and their characters, that we've grown to love and analyze, and which are inspired or influenced by Freudian theories, are in Freud's view incorrect and misinterpreted and he finds them annoying.

[Ahmed · Rating 4 out of 5]

محاضرات جديدة في التحليل النفسي ..... سيجموند فرويد

سبع محاضرات أو دروس أو دراسات أو آراء أو تحليلات ألقاها فرويد على جمهور افتراضي، ناقش فيها العديد من القضايا.
أسلوب فرويد بسيط ومنطقي ومنمق للغاية، وترجمة جورج طرابيشي ساعدت على إضفاء رونق خاص في أبهى صورها.
العلم والغيب والدين والأنوثة والمرأة كلها قضايا طرحها وناقشها فرويد.
المحاضرة الأخيرة بعنوان (حول تصور الكون) أهم وأقيّم ما في المحاضرات.

24-12-2015

[J.D. Steens · Rating 4 out of 5]

Freud’s emphasis on sex and the id aligns with evolutionary theory. Life is molecular replication. Organisms are the vehicle for that process. That process requires survival (to replicate) and the bodily instincts service this need. These instincts are Freud’s id. Also, as Darwin argues, the individual does not survive without the group. While each group sets up its own rules, belief systems, and symbols, there’s an underlying (or overarching) need to be part of a group. Hence, the full suite of social instincts discussed by Darwin that make the individual attentive to group requirements. This is Freud’s superego and this id-versus-superego conflict is then mediated by ego. The id, driven by the pleasure principle, confronts social norms that, as the reality principle, restrain it. From both the perspective of Freud and Darwin, this self-versus-social dynamic lies at the heart of what it means to be human. (1)

Energy runs throughout Freud’s individual-group dynamics and their id-superego structure. This is Schopenhauer’s Will. For Freud, as for Schopenhauer, life’s energy is internally directed. (2) The energy expressed through instinctive structures is plastic, i.e., energy is tendency or disposition; except for hunger and thirst, it is not deterministic. With this plasticity, energy can readily move about and this is seen in Freud’s libido theory of the instincts. (3) This is the energy of the id, which includes sexual and the other instincts, that places the individual at odds with social rules that regulate instinctual expression. Yet, when repressed, id energy remains and expresses itself in various ways—anxiety (abnormal anxiety, neurosis), sublimation (transfers to other objects), dreams (including wish fulfillment), and Freudian slips.

Freud says that we turn our aggression on others to prevent self-aggression. “It really seems,” he writes, “as though it is necessary for us to destroy some other thing or person in order not to destroy ourselves, in order to guard against the impulsion to self-destruction.” We are aggressive beings. “The aggressive instincts, whose aim is destruction” stand in contrast with Eros, or love of life. (4) “The erotic instincts…seek to combine more and more living substance into every greater unities,” Freud writes, as opposed to the death instincts that seek “to do away with life” and “reestablish the inorganic state from which life evolved.” Freud goes on to say, intriguingly, that, “If it is true that…life once proceeded out of inorganic matter, then, according to our presumption, an instinct must have arisen which sought to do away with life once more and to reestablish the inorganic state.” That instinct or instincts are the aggressive instincts.

Freud has been criticized by scientists who see psychoanalysis as a bogus science. Freud, though, believed that truth must correspond to what is observed in the material world and, he states, “Psycho-analysis has a special right to speak for the scientific Weltanschauung….Its contribution to science lies precisely in having extended research to the mental field.” (5) He contrast his approach with the “three powers” that hold a non-scientific view of truth. Art is one but “it is harmless” and generally “it makes no attempt at invading the realm of reality.” Philosophy is another, but it is basically irrelevant as it “has no direct influence on the great mass of mankind; it is of interest to only a small number even of the top layer of intellectuals and is scarcely intelligible to anyone else.” Religion is the third area but this one is dangerous because “it is an immense power which has the strongest emotions of human beings at its service.”

This is a great series of Freud's essays.

(1) Freud opposes id to superego. I’d argue that Darwin’s social instincts are also part of the id as the need to be part of a group is every bit equivalent to the hunger, sex, and desire that we typically associate with the id. Seen this way, the superego lies within the id. This does not negate the conflict between self as id and the self as social being (superego), but it does lodge the self-social conflict within the id itself, as opposed to an external source that imposes itself on the id. The social need is instinctual and inside; it's why the self cares about what “society” thinks.

(2) This counters the perspective that the individual is a passive being who waits to be stimulated. “An instinct,” Freud writes, “is distinguished from a stimulus by the fact that it arises from sources of stimulation within the body, that it operates as a constant force and that the subject cannot avoid it by flight, as is possible with an external stimulus….We picture it as a certain quota of energy which presses in a particular direction.”

(3) Beyond specific, ad hoc instincts, Freud separates “two main instincts or classes of instincts or groups of instincts in accordance with the two great needs-hunger and love….the living individual organism is at the command of two intentions, self-preservation and the preservation of the species….what we are talking now is biological psychology....It was as representing this aspect of the subject that the ‘ego-instincts’ and the ‘sexual instincts’ were introduced into psycho-analysis.” Here, Freud seems to separate the energy of the id (self-preservation) with the energy of sex (preservation of the species). Yet elsewhere and in other commentary, the libido in Freudian theory involves all psychic energy, not just sexual energy, and this makes sense in terms of evolutionary theory: “id” energy and “libido” energy are integrally related as doing what needs to be done to survive is the evolutionary imperative for sexual replication to occur.

(4) “When it is put to you like this, you will scarcely regard it as a novelty,” Freud writes. “It looks like an attempt at a theoretical transfiguration of the commonplace opposition between loving and hating which coincides, perhaps, with the other polarity, of attraction and repulsion, which physics assumes in the inorganic world.” Freud then notes the strong cultural denial of the aggressive instincts. “To include it in the human constitution,” he states, “appears sacrilegious. It contradicts too many religious presumptions and social convention.”

(5) Freud adds to this: “It is not permissible to declare that science is one field of human mental activity and that religion and philosophy are others, at least its equal in value, and that science has no business to interfere with the other two: that they all have an equal claim to be true and that everyone is at liberty to choose from which he will draw his convictions and in which he will place his belief. A view of this kind is regarded as particularly superior, tolerant, broad-minded and free from illiberal prejudices. Unfortunately it is not tenable and shares all the pernicious features of an entirely unscientific Weltanschauung and is equivalent to one in practice. It is simply a fact that the truth cannot be tolerant, that it admits of no compromises or limitations, that research regards every sphere of human activity as belonging to it and that it must be relentlessly critical if any other power tries to take over any part of it.”

[Avery · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sigmund Freud changed his mind a lot. With a career spanning nearly half a century, he couldn’t help but continuously revise his theory in light of new findings. His detractors may consider these changes to be simply ad hoc revisions to a theory that was untenable to begin with, a series of mental gymnastics trying in futility to get the puzzle pieces to fit. I’m generally sympathetic to Freud’s theories, so I’m inclined to read this as a sequence of growth and humble intellect in the face of a notoriously obscure object of study.

I recently read his New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis [1933], which he positions as an update and expansion of his original lecture series from 1915-17. Nearly two decades later, Freud has significantly developed his theories, and here he directly presents these developments and how they came about.

Freud is a writer who thinks aloud; even within the course of a given book, he revises his arguments. (This is prominent especially in Beyond the Pleasure Principle.) And these being lectures, these writings exhibit Freud’s conversational tone, which helps the reader gain a glimpse into his thought process. This is immensely rewarding and, dare I say, endearing. In this post I’m just going to go through each lecture and note my initial thoughts and impressions.

“Revision of the Theory of Dreams”

This lecture wasn’t of much interest to me, and I’m having trouble remembering what he even said. Freud’s dream interpretation was one of the earliest components of his theory, with his landmark Interpretation of Dreams published in 1899, 34 years before this lecture. That being said, I don’t believe too much had changed, at least not since the original lecture series.

“Dreams and Occultism”

A rather bizarre exploration of what Freud terms “occultism,” things like psychic readings, telepathy, etc. Freud asserts that occultist propositions can often be fully made sense of only with the help of psychoanalysis, in a similar process as dream interpretation. Freud admits the possibility that telepathy might be real, perhaps some primordial communication method, a leftover from before humans developed language.

“The Dissection of the Psychical Personality”

This to me is the real centerpiece of the lectures. Here Freud introduces the tripartite schema of the ego, super-ego, and id, which he originally set forth in The Ego and the Id (1923), well after the first lecture series. Freud further cautions against equating the id with the unconscious, as super-ego and even ego processes can inhabit that dark realm.

“Anxiety and Instinctual Life”

This rather technical lecture elaborates on Freud’s theory of anxiety, where it comes from, and how psychoanalysis seeks to address it. Freud reverses common sense by arguing that, rather than anxiety being a product of repression, in fact repression itself is a product of anxiety, covering up an already-present state in the id.

“Femininity”

By far the most troubling piece, for reasons that are easy to guess. I never thought of Freud as one to look to for gender politics, but this lecture is particularly regressive in ways that I don’t remember being present in his Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905). Ignorance cannot be invoked here, for Freud explicitly mentions and then rejects feminist theories. Even so, I have to admire his intellectual honesty and care with which he crafted this lecture.

But basically, Freud attempts to construct a psychoanalytic definition of femininity, and notes certain differences in how women behave. He seeks a basis for gender differences in the process by which girls supposedly experience penis envy, and that women have to transfer their attachment to their mother onto their father, whereas boys have no such problem. Heterosexuality of course is taken for granted here, but I wouldn’t expect otherwise.

That being said, Freud has some surprisingly insightful comments on the fluidity of sexual difference, the fact that there is no “feminine” or “masculine” libido, or the centrality of gender in social perception:

“When you meet a human being, the first distinction you make is ‘male or female?’ and you are accustomed to make the distinction with unhesitating certainty.”

“Explanations, Applications and Orientations”

Freud does a retrospective on the results of psychoanalysis in the previous decades, its efficacy in clinical settings, and defends the field from its detractors.

“The Question of a Weltanschauung”

Here Freud explores a psychoanalytic take on Weltanschauung, a usually-untranslated German word that more or less means “worldview,” a distinct theoretical framework for interpreting, well, everything. Freud first asserts that psychoanalysis cannot have its own Weltanschauung, but rather must follow the lead of science in general, insofar as science can be considered a Weltanschauung at all; Freud points out science’s emphasis on negative claims which somewhat contradicts the spirit of a Weltanschauung.

He then in turn addresses three such worldviews: religion, nihilism, and Marxism. This lecture was of particular interest to me because of my interest in these topics (nihilism to a lesser extent). He takes a rather traditional atheistic view, unsurprisingly, as Freud was a deeply positivistic thinker and invested in the ethos of heroic, modernist science. On top of that he adds the idea that religion is the sublimation of certain childhood needs for fatherly protection. I have not read his major work on religion, The Future of an Illusion (1927), so I’m not sure if he tread any new ground here.

Freud is critical of Marxism because he, like countless others, believes that it underestimates the impact of non-economic factors on human society. Freud cites material factors (e.g. resource availability, technological developments) and psychology as major areas. This is hardly worth discussing as it’s been done so many times.

What surprised me was that, although Freud was rightfully critical of the repression (in the political, not the psychoanalytic sense) occurring in Soviet society, he was actually quite laudatory of the Soviet experiment, more so than I would have thought. He refers to the USSR as a “tremendous experiment of producing a new order” and “the message of a better future,” although he goes on to say that he has serious doubts as to whether the experiment will succeed. Honestly, not a bad view; a prescient one, even, and aligned with his comments on Bolshevism in Civilization and Its Discontents.

[nettie · Rating 1 out of 5]

i will fight freud till my last breath

[Audrey]

as someone in my class so eloquently put it, "i read a secondary source on freud and i go 'wow he was really doing something here!' and then i read freud and i go 'oh. no.'" zaretsky's "secrets of the soul" (the first couple chapters) and lacan's philosophical interpretation in particular really changed my viewpoint on freud, would recommend if you are a classic freud hater as i too once was and basically still am ngl

that said i would definitely recommend reading at least one of the lectures if you haven't; the way freud himself frames his ideas is a lot more compelling than the filtered-down pop culture interpretation that i had going into this. still crazy wild tho

[James · Rating 3 out of 5]

Freud is one of the most controverisal people ever to have lived, and many of his ideas cause a great deal of rage and hatered and other happy emotions. Not all aspects of 'New Introductory Letters on Psychanalysis' are relevant; some couldn't be less irrelevent. You also need to consider that this isn't the most interesting or provocitive psychology piece you'll ever read in the least bit. Nonetheless, Freud's fleuncy is only rarely rivaled. That chain-smoking coke-head could defintely come up with a well-written lecture, and this certainly does mean something, obviously. However, there are considerably better works by Freud; I'd only reccomend this one to thoose who are unfamilair with hi.

[أحمد · Rating 4 out of 5]

هي محاضرات أخيرة كتبها قبل وفاته بسبع أعوام، ولم يلقها قط، ولم يعمد لذلك أصلاً، بسبب تقدمه في السن وشيخوخته الواهنة أولاً، وبسبب خضوعه لعملية جراحية في فكّه لاستئصال سرطان، ولكنه لم يستطع فكاكًا من رغبته في محاورة الجمهور، أو من تخيّل أنه يواجه جمهورًا غير مرئيًا ويرى أثر كلماته الصادمة عليهم وجهًا لوجه فيطمئنه ويخفف من روعه، أو من الشعور بالرضا الذي يجلبه قوله للجمهور الافتراضيّ: "سيداتي سادتي أدعوكم من جديد بعد انقطاع دام أكثر من خمسة عشر عامًا لأتداول وإياكم فيما جدَّ!" ، وأحيانًا أظن أن دراسته للمحاماة في بداية حياته لها الدور الأكبر في أساليب عرضه لما يريد قوله، فهو بصير بمسالك الحديث، ويسبق ويتحوّط للآراء المعارضة، ويناور بسفينته في ممرات ضيقة ووعرة وباقتدار حتى يخلص بطريقة لطيفة إلى ما يريد إثباته

ولكن هذا لا يخفي شيئًا، أعني أن القراءة له تضعنا دائمًا في عالم مظلم ومخيف جدًا تكتنفه الشرور والشهوات والغريزة والرغبة في الإيذاء والعدوان، من ناحية الإنسان، وفي عالم يخضع لقوانين مجحفة وقاسية لا تعرف الرحمة، وهو لا يبالي بهذا!، ويقولها علانية، ثم يواجه جمهوره غير المرئي عقب حديثه عن غريزة تدمير الذات مثلاً، ويخاطبه بقوله: قد تهزّون أكتافكم وتقولون: "أن ما تعرضه علينا هنا هو فلسفة شوبنهاور التشاؤمية، وليس نظرية علمية!"، وهل من مانع، سيداتي سادتي، يحول دون أن يحدس مفكّر جريء بما ستؤيّد صحته فيما بعد الملاحظة الشاقة والجافة؟ ثم أوَ لم يفصح الأقدمون، قبل شوبنهاور بعهد بعيد، عن أفكار متشابهة؟

ولكني لا أنكر إنني شغفت كثيرًا بما يقول، وأعجبت بدفاعه عن منهجه ورأيه المتعقّل عن المنشقّين عنه، وافتتنت ببساطة ما كتبه عن علم النفس الفردي الذي أسسه أدلر بعد انفصال الأخير عن مدرسته، كما أنني تساءلت قبل عن توجيهه التربوي بعد أن كشف لنا عن مدى سيطرة الغرائز الجنسية، فقد ترك الباب مفتوحًا بشكل مخيف أمامنا آخر مرة، ولكن ها هو الآن يستدرك في هذه المحاضرات ما قال، فيضيف أن طريق تربية الأطفال وتدخّل المجتمع يجب أن يسير متوازنًا بين الإباحة والكبت، فالإباحة المطلقة للغرائز ضارّة بالطفل وتدفعه للهلاك، والكبت كذلك يخلّف فيه أعراضًا نفسية هائلة ستقف عائقًا ضخمًا أمامه فيما تبقى من العمر في التعامل الصحيح مع الناس والمجتمع، أي بعبارة أخرى أنه حمد التوسّط في الأمر، وإن لم يقل ذلك اللفظ تمامًا، بل قال بلغة علمية رائعة:

أن الطفولة مرحلة من الحياة عسيرة الاجتياز بالنظر إلى أن الطفل مطالَب بأن يتمثّل في أجل وجيز من الزمن ويستوعب كل محصّلة الحضارة التي تم بناؤها على امتداد آلاف من السنين، فعليه أن يتعلم أو يبدأ بأن يتعلم كيف يتحكم بغرائزه ويتكيف مع الوسط الاجتماعي، ولا يتوصل الطفل من تلقاء نفسه إلى هذا التبدل، بل لابد أن تقسره التربية عليه قسرًا إلى حد بعيد، ولا غرو ألا تصيب هذه المهمة في كثير من الأحيان إلا نجاحًا جزئيًا



فهو خيط رفيع إذن بين الإباحة والمنع، ويعتذر بعد ذلك عن إهماله طرق هذه الناحية التربوية بأداة علم النفس، وبرره أيضًا بأنه كان يحجم الخوض في مجال وميدان كان يشعر بالعجز أمام قدرته على استيعاب نواحي هذه المجال والميدان قبل الخوض فيه، "بل أني لأصارحكم بأني لا أشعر بأن هذه المهمة في طاقتي!"، ولكنه يعود إلى ذكر ضرورة تطبيق منهج علم النفس في "مضمار علم التربية وتنشئة الأجيال القادمة"، ثم يقول في التفاتة آسرة:

أن هذا الموضوع هو بين سائر المواضيع التي شُغِلَ التحليل النفسي نفسه بها: أعظمها أهمية إطلاقًا، بالنظر إلى ما يفتحه من آفاق مستقبلية، أعني به تطبيق التحليل النفسي في مضمار علم التربية وتنشئة الأجيال القادمة، وأنه ليغبطني على كل حال أن أخبركم بأن أبنتي «آنا فرويد» قد نذرت نفسها لهذه المهمة، وفي هذا كفّارة عن إحجامي وإهمالي


وهي كذلك، ثم أن أحد كتبها عن هذا المجال قامت دار المعارف بترجمته من قبل، وعنوانه وحده يكشف عن أثر والدها فيها، وكلماته الأخيرة هذه تمثل دافعًا قويًا لاستكشف آراءها التربوية



ترى هل كان قصده الدعاية لها

:D


أمزح!، كما أنه لم يغادر فرص تطبيق منهج علم النفس التحليلي على المجالات الأخرى، فله تطبيقات نفسية كثيرة عن الأديان والطوطم وحيوات الفنانين الكبار مثل دا فنشي ومايكل أنجلو، وفي المحاضرة الأخيرة من هذه المحاضرات قرر التطبيق بنفسه مرة أخرى، فجاءت محاضرته الأخيرة بعنوان "حول تصّور للكون"، وفيها رؤيته حسب التحليل النفسي لفكرة نشأة الكون، وكنت قد قرأت من قبل كتابه "مستقبل وهم"، وهو فيه لا يعترف بالإلهيات ولا الرسالات والأديان، ويراها من تخيّل واختراع العقل الإنساني في طوره الأوّل وأثرًا من آثار الإيحاء والوهم، لذا فهو في محاضرته لا يذهب بعيدًا، فلا إله يقف وراء خلق الكون، ولا قوة إلهية، ولا وجود لفكرة قوانين أخلاقية على الأرض تقوم على إثابة الفضيلة ومعاقبة الرذيلة، وهو يبرر هذا الأمر بسذاجة بالغة، فيقول:
فغالبًا ما يضع الفرد العنيف، المكار المحتال، الذي لا يردعه وازع من ضمير، يده على الخيرات التي يسيل لها لعاب الناس، بينما يبقى الإنسان الصالح خلو اليدين


ويستطرد:
أن قوى خفية، غامضة، قاسية، عديمة الإحساس هي التي تتحكم بالمصير الإنساني، أما نظام الثواب والعقاب، الذي يقول الدين أنه يحكم العالم، فجميع الدلائل تشير إلى أنه لا وجود له



ويضيف أخيرًا:
لقد أمدّ التحليل النفسي نقد التصور الديني للعالم بحجة أخيرة إذ أبان أن الدين يرتد في أصله إلى خوف الطفل، وعزا مضمونه إلى الرغبات والحاجات الطفلية التي تظل قائمة حتى لدى الراشد، وليس في هذا – بحصر المعنى – دحض للدين، بل إيضاح ضروري لمعارفنا فيما يتصل به، ونحن لا نتناقض معه إلا حين يفتخر بأصله الإلهي، وهي في الحق لا يخطئ في دعواه هذه إذا ما جرى التسليم بتفسيرنا للإلوهية



وبالتأكيد ضحكت من هذه الجملة الأخيرة، فتفسيره للإلوهية يفضى في نهاية الأمر إلى أنه لا وجود للإلوهية ذاتها!، أي بمعناها لدى الفرد المؤمن بالدين السماوي، إذن فتفسيره يعتبر ببساطة – وبحصر المعنى – دحضًا للدين!، وعلى أي حال، إنه لا يغادر هذا المسلك حتى عند حديثه عن الإيمان، فهو يرى أن الإنسان تعلم تصريف شؤونه اليومية من التجربة والخطأ، أي بعقله وحده وبإرث اكتسب مهاراته في طفولته من محصّلة حضارة بيئته كلها المتجمّع فيها خبرات آلاف السنين من تجارب وأخطاء أسلافه، أي للمرة الثانية: بتاريخ العقل الإنساني وحده، لذا فعند حديثه عن الإيمان الذي يلزم به الدين مُتبعيه، يقول:

ومن ثَمَّ فأنه لشطط وإسراف من جانب الدين حينما يبغي أن يقسر الإنسان على إخضاع أخصّ شؤونه لسلطة تدّعي أن لها امتياز عدم الوقوع تحت سلطان قوانين الفكر العقلي، أما فيما يتصل بالحماية التي يعد الدين أتباعه بتوفيرها لهم فأعتقد أن ما من أحد منّا يقبل بأن يركب سيارة يقول سائقها أنه لا يريد أن يريد أن يربك نفسه بأنظمة المرور، وأنه لا يطيب أن يصدع إلا بأمر نزوات خياله الجامح


وخيال فرويد جامح هنا أيضًا، ولا يخلو في تصوره لمفهوم الدين ونشأة الكون من سذاجة كذلك، ولكنني أحسب أن هذه مسالك لازمة يتحتم السير فيها والوصول إليها على من ينكر وجود قوة عليا تدبر الكوّن بسنن وقوانين، وإلا وصل إلى طريق مسدود، فالقوانين الإلهية لا تتحقق هكذا في غمضة عين وفور وقوع الظلم والخطل ليتحدث عن أن واقع الحال يقول أن المكّار المحتال الشرير يفوز على الضعيف دائمًا!، وإذن ما فائدة الإ��مان نفسه بالغيبيات إذا ما كانت الإثابة والعقوبة لا تتأخّران ثانية واحدة عن لحظة وقوع الفعل!!

أقصد أنني لم أحب هذه المحاضرة التطبيقية الأخيرة، ولكنها لا تغضّ على أي حال من فتنة سائر المحاضرات الأُخَر


وأيّ رجل كان!!

[mohab samir · Rating 5 out of 5]

هذه المحاضرات هى إعادة صياغة متقدمة ومنقحة للمحاضرات التى ألقاها فرويد على طلابه فى فصول دراسية مختلفة وجمعت فى كتب ثلاثة بعنوان ( مدخل الى التحليل النفسى ، ونظرية الاحلام ، والنظرية العامة للأمراض العصابية ) . ويقدم فرويد هذا الجزء الرابع من باب الأمانة العلمية التى لم يتخلى عنها إلى سنواته الاخيرة ، حيث حرص على تضمين النتائج الجديدة التى توصل إليها التحليل النفسى - خلال الفترة الفاصلة بين المحاضرات - سواء من ناحية نشوء بعض الأمراض أو علاجها ، كما أراد التركيز على التعديلات النظرية التى أجراها عندما تبين له قصور بعض المفاهيم والعلاقات القديمة حتى تلك الموجودة منها فى أساس النظرية .
وهو بذلك يعيد رسم المخطط الخاص بمكونات الجهاز النفسى ( الشعور وما قبل الشعور واللاشعور ) وعلاقاته النسبية الطابع ، وبالتالى تتعدل النظرة الى ديناميكية الشخصية النفسية بما تتضمنه من ( هو وانا وأنا أعلى ) وما يتبعهم من مبادئ ( اللذة والواقع والمثالية ) وما يمارسونه بقوة متباينة من أشكال ( الاشباع او الكبت او التأنيب ) وما يتلقونه من الخارج فى صورة ( لذة أو صدمة مؤلمة أو مثل عليا ) .
وتبعاً للحركة الديناميكية النسبية لمختلف أجزاء الجهاز النفسى والشخصية النفسية - فى تعالقهم ببعضهم البعض وبالعالم الخارجى - تتحدد طبيعة الأمراض وشدتها والتى تتكون كمناطق هشة أو كأورام متضخمة فى النفس .
ولا يغفل فرويد فى أى من كتاباته أوجه القصور التى لازالت تعترى النظرية فى بعض النقاط التفصيلية من جانب أو بعض الأسئلة المركزية من جانب آخر . وأما بالنسبة للمسائل التفصيلية فإنه خبر بنفسه التقدم التدريجى فى الإجابة على التساؤلات الخاصة بكل جزء من أجزاء النظرية بما تشمله وما قدمته التجربة المستمرة والتفكير النقدى المستمر من تحسين الإجابات وتعديلها إلى الشكل الأكثر تجانساً ومنطقية نظرياً والأكثر فعالية عملياً . أما بخصوص بعض الأسئلة المركزية فهناك منها ما قدم بصدده إجابات منطقية خالصة نظراً لعدم توافر المعلومات التجريبية والمقدمات الكافية لتقديم تفسير علمى لها ، كتلك الخاصة بمنشأ الشعور تاريخياً أو تلك الخاصة بتحديد نِسَب أهمية أو أولوية أى من العاملين النفسى أو البيولوجى على صيرورة المرض النفسى . وهناك أسئلة مزَجَ فيها المنطق لدعم النتائج التجريبية الغير كافية بذاتها للإدعاء بتفسير علمى كالأسئلة الخاصة بجدوى العلاج التحليلى لبعض الأمراض ذات الطبيعة النرجسية . وفى كلتا الحالتين يلتزم فرويد بتواضع العالم الحقيقى أن لا يؤكد على هذه الإجابات إلا بقدر ما تدعمها المعرفة العلمية المستقبلية فى مختلف المجالات المتعالقة كما إلى تقدم بحوث التحليل النفسى فى جانبه التجريبى .
وأود أخيرا الإشارة إلى المتعة العقلية التى تلازمنى خلال قراءة كتابات فرويد والمتعلقة بالناحيتين العلمية والأدبية . ولكنها تتجلى بشكل خاص فى تأملاته الفلسفية التى تُبرز وتُكمل عبقريته الفكرية . ونجدها بشكل واضح فى عدة كتب وفصول كما نجدها فى المحاضرة الأخيرة من هذا الكتاب والتى تناول فيها عرض النظرات المختلفة للكون ، وهى جديرة بالقراءة لذاتها .

[Sam · Rating 4 out of 5]

once again, simultaneously insane and compelling

[Denise · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reading some of Freud's ideas now in the present is an adventurous trip. There are valuable ideas in this book that have been forgotten over time, dismissed maybe. There are also ideas ideas which are clearly better to have been forgotten or dismissed.

And then there are some of Freud's more personal rumblings (they show more about his personality than his actual theories) which seem funny now... But then I remember how this is a lecture, a serious talk, which was, at some point in the past, delivered in an academic settings, to a prestigious or would-be prestigious audience, by a person who actually believed and lived by these sayings.

Freud had some really valuable ideas which deserve to be kept and used today... and he had some other ideas which are totally off. And how happy I am now to be able to more or less distinguish them.

[Mounir · Rating 3 out of 5]

يحتوي الكتاب على "المحاضرات" السبع الأخيرة التي نشرها فرويد في بداية الثلاثينات من القرن العشرين، ورغم أنها مكتوبة بصيغة إلقاء على جمهور من المستمعين، إلا أن فرويد لم يكن ينوي أن يلقيها على جمهور مثل المحاضرات السابقة التي ألقاها في الأعوام من 1915 - 1917 والتي تحمل عنوان "محاضرات تمهيدية في التحليل النفسي"

المحاضرة 29
عبارة عن تلخيص وإعادة تذكير بنظريته في الأحلام

المحاضرة 30
يذكر فيها فرويد بعض الصلات الغريبة وغير المفهومة بين الأحلام وبعض الظواهر الغيبية مثل التخاطر. وهو هنا على غير عادته لا يجازف بتقديم تفسير نفسي واضح لهذه الظواهر

المحاضرات 31 و32
مراجعة وإضافات لنظريته في تركيب الشخصية ومكوناتها ووظائف هذه المكونات، ثم تعديل لنظريته في القلق والكبت والغرائز، وصلة القلق بالكبت وأيهما يؤدي إلى الآخر

المحاضرة 33
خصصها فرويد لشرح نفسية المرأة من وجهة نظر التحليل النفسي، وتبدو هذه المحاضرة كوصف شامل ودقيق لنظريته حول التطور الجنسي للطفلة الإنثى - حيث أنه فيما سبق كان يركز دائما على تطور الولد وليس البنت - ويشرح بالتفصيل الفرق بين عقدة أوديب لدى الولد والبنت ومآلها لدى كل منهما

المحاضرة 34
تشمل موضوعات متفرقة، منها انتقاد لأتباع التحليل النفسي الذين استقلوا بأفكار ومدارس مغايرة عن مدرسته؛ وتنويه عن دور التحليل النفسي في إثراء العلوم الإنسانية، ودور التحليل النفسي المأمول في تربية الأطفال

المحاضرة الأخيرة 35
وعنوانها "نظرة إلى الكون" حسب الترجمة العربية، وعنوانها الأصلي هو
Weltanschauung
وهي كلمة ألمانية يقول فرويد بنفسه أنه يصعب ترجمتها إلى أي لغة أخرى، حتى أن الترجمة الإنجليزية تحتفظ بهذه الكلمة كعنوان للمحاضرة
ويمكن اعتبار هذه المحاضرة جزءا من مجموعة من الكتب والمؤلفات والمقالات والرسائل التي ألفها فرويد في النصف الأخير من حياته، والتي انشغل فيها بالحديث عن مشكلات الحضارة والإنسانية والثقافة والدين. وهو هنا ينتقد النظرة الدينية الغيبية للعالم لاعتمادها على الوجدان، ويدافع بقوة عن العقل والنظرة العلمية على اعتبار أن العقل والتفكير المنطقي العقلاني يمكن أن يكون قاسم مشترك أعظم بين جميع البشر. ويبدو فرويد هنا من ناحية كأحد التنويريين الكبار في بداية القرن العشرين، ولكنه أيضا كشخص ينتمي إلى القرن التاسع عشر لم يستطع التخلص من اليقين الزائد بالعلم، والإيمان بأنه الحل الأمثل والوحيد لمشكلات العالم. وقد تجاوز بعض أقران فرويد هذه النظرة، على سبيل المثال كارل جوستاف يونج الذي كان تلميذا وزميلا لفرويد في البداية ثم اختلفا بشدة وانفصل يونج وأسس مدرسته الخاصة المعروفة باسم "علم النفس التحليلي" وقد انشغل يونج بأمور عديدة اعتبرها فرويد من قبيل "الشعوذة والدروشة" مثل الجوانب الروحية للإنسان وصلة علم النفس بالدين وبالغيبيات والأساطير والرموز المشتركة بين الحضارات والثقافات المختلفة

[Meredith Leah · Rating 1 out of 5]

Freud was extremely obsessed with penises, anuses, and childhood sexuality. He quite literally states in the lecture on women that a woman's desire to pursue an intellectual career is a manifestation of penis envy. He states that women were telling him that they were sexually abused by their fathers and he didn't believe them and it was more likely that these young girls were sexually fantasizing about their fathers. I suspect that the main reason Freud's ideas gained any traction was that his nephew, the famous propagandist Edward Bernays, had his books translated into English and pushed them through propaganda and high level connections. A good documentary to watch is: The Century of the Self, it can be found on YouTube.

[Ethan]

The oft recommended New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis have, in equal share, a lot to offer of interest in a study of Freud, as well as a lot one can discard relatively quickly.

Lecture 31. THE DISSECTION OF THE PSYCHICAL PERSONALITY, Lecture 33. FEMININITY, and Lecture 35. THE QUESTION OF A WELTANSCHAUUNG are easily the standout lectures, with the most to offer in my view and makes the volume worth it. The rest of the lectures, while having glimpses of interest don't strike me as particularly worth reading as one wouldn't gleam far too much additionally.

Lecture 31. Is perhaps the most famous and is Freud's illustration of his relatively updated sketch of the mind. It features the newly defined concepts of the Id and the Super-Ego and is also the subject of both a lot of (maybe wilful) misinterpretation, if not simply referenced without having been read. There is no mention of the supposed "subconscious", a term which seems mistakenly attributed to Freud as he actively avoids it in his mature work, and his sketch of the personality seems, if not agreeable, at least revolutionary in our view of consciousness; there being drives and desires that we can't directly access but nevertheless influence our self (the Id broadly), but also the Super-Ego which is the moral force that takes over the parenting force into adulthood. There is, identified, three pressures on the Ego which are the external world, the moral force of the Super-Ego, and the Id in all its ominous ambiguity. If there's anything to be said on this lecture, it's that it is base-level reading for Freud and a source for correcting misinterpretations of his work.

Lecture 33. is impressive if anything for being relatively measured. It doesn't discuss women in a necessarily misogynistic manner, and men are treated with equal consideration in the formulation of the particularities of the Oedipus Complex in both sexes. It does, though, suffer from grouping particular traits as masculine which are seen as more desirable, over the feminine traits and this sort of conceptualisation may operate poorly in putting Psychoanalysis on a very particular road. But it isn't unsalvageable in any way.

Lecture 35. concerns the concept of a Weltanschauung which can be very roughly translated to a "worldview" but more broadly encapsulates the universe and seeks to place everything within a complete and holistic system. The main object of attack here is religion, which has suffered the problem of attempting to systematise where it simply can't. There is an interesting rather Feuerbach-like comment on God as the place of the father which reads distinctly like a comment on alienation. "They attributed magical power to words. This feature was later taken over by religion, 'And God said: Let there be light!,' And there was light."

The lecture on occultism is fine, but I thought it was a waste of paper. I don't think I needed to read a ten page plus speculation on the possibility of occult happenings like telepathy with a few examples of odd-happenings which are immediately given explanation to. If the occult is real then cool, but I didn't need to read that.

[Manas Datta · Rating 4 out of 5]

The definition of religion as stated by Freud is to the point, precise and hits the nail on head. The development of masculine and feminine traits are quite resembling what we see in our daily lives.

However I have a point of contention, When it comes to describing religion and giving accord to the presence of man as the divine, I believe is not correct. The interpretation has to be deeper than that. Based on my understanding of my religion, the god is considered to be a phase which does not give the satisfaction of fulfillment but more like a state where the satisfaction of thing does not account for the lot. For instance, it has scientifically been proven that any development has to lie outside of one's comfort zone, be it physical or psychical. And even in the religious scripture, the understanding is quite the same and ask for similar rituals as by science. As stated by Freud, that we are at a very early stage of discoveries, I believe the more and more capable we get on understanding the being and the relative benevolences, the differentiation could be brought down further.

Religion is just any other book and its understanding depends wholly on its reader. I am not an ardent believer in the divinity, but yes I do believe that if we explore further deep inside us, what in the language of Freud can be referred to as the ID, we would better be able to understand our thought and its origin.

What Freud defines as ID, Ego and Super-ego is very similar to what Vedic scriptures define as Tamas, Rajas, and Sattva, the three states of mind. Based on the Ego, that is rajas, an action or a reaction is initiated from a being that is either directed towards ID/ Tamas or Super-ego/ Sattva

[Mohamed Karaly · Rating 4 out of 5]

يتناول فرويد فى هذه المحاضرات الجميلة أفكاره ونظرياته التى قدمها من قبل فى مجموعة من الكتب بشكل أكثر تفصيلا، مع إضافة بعض التعديلات الطفيفة، وكانت قراءتها بالنسبة لى مراجعة وتذكير بهذه الكتب مع فهم أنضج وأكثف، ومتعة أكبر وموضوعات الكتاب هى تلخيص لكتب: تفسير الأحلام، ثلاث مقالات فى نظرية الجنسية، الأنا والهو، وما فوق مبدأ اللذة. وعبر صفحات الكتاب، يمازج أسلوب فرويد البلاغى الرحيب وأنفاسه الهادئة، نغمة اعتذار عن الحقائق الكئيبة التى انتهت إليها أبحاثه. ومن بين الثقة التى تعبر بها عبقريته عن نفسها، هناك همسات متواضعة وإيحاء دائم بخطوات متلمسة فى الظلام ومتشبثة بآمال ضئيلة فى تحقيق أسطورة ما يُسمى ب"العلاج النفسى"! وهناك مثلا فى نهاية الفصل الجحيمى الذى يتناول فيه "الأنوثة" جملة قبضت صدرى، حيث صرح فى نهاية الفصل الطويل، الذى تناول فيه التكوين النفسى للمرأة وأحالة بكامله لمجموعة من العقد التى ولدها افتقاد القضيب، بأن المرأة تشيخ مبكرا بسبب حجم الآلام التى تتعرض لها أثناء نضجها مقارنة بالرجل، حتى إن علاجها النفسى بعد سن الثلاثين، فى حالة إذا كانت مصابة بأعصبة، يدخل فى عداد المستحيل!، وشعرت بطابع غنائى مأسوى طغى على موضوعية فرويد وهو يضع اللمسات الأخيرة لنظريتة بصدد الأنوثة فى هذا الفصل. لقد صورها كحيوان مهمل تسرى الطبيعة فى مسراها لا تلوى عليه. ! ١

[Daria · Rating 1 out of 5]

Freud should not be considered the father of psychology whatsoever. His arguments about the mind really only has substance when he is lecturing about dreams, and even then he uses such laughably fake examples to try and prove his assumptions. Otherwise, Freud is simply a sexual deviant who views women as nothing more than foolish erotic tools. The only thing you can gain out of reading Freud's work is completing a required class reading.

[Nathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

J’ai lu particulièrement la conférence sur les diverses instances de la personnalité psychique. J’ai trouvé que ces conférences donnent une exposition très intéressante de la pensée de Freud et l’approfondisse plus que l’introduction. Il en va de soi que cette lecture est aussi donné à des gens qui ont déjà eu une introduction basique à la psychanalyse.

[Eternal · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of my favourites. Some of the chapters I wasn’t really interested in, but his theories are pretty spot on. I always take it with me for long flights, all my sticky notes are still in there since 2018.

It would be a 5 but as I said, I doubt every single chapter will be of interest. I’m not really into the dream lectures.

[Paulius · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ego, Super-Ego, ID. Femininity.

[Gayle Byrne · Rating 4 out of 5]

3 stars until the last chapter bumped it up!

[Daniel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Freud is an idiot.

[avery · Rating 2 out of 5]

i’m so over it man i’ve read this about 40 times for school and it never gets any less dull

[Marion Linke · Rating 3 out of 5]

Als Hörbuch gehört. Es ist sehr interessant zu lesen/ hören, wo die Grundlagen der heutigen Psychologie herkommen und welche Hintergründe zu Freuds Theorien geführt haben. Natürlich komme ich nicht darum hin zu erkennen, dass grosse Teile mittlerweile veraltet sind. Und dennoch bereichert dieses Buch mein Grundverständnis und erweitert meinen Horizont.

[Jediraven · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have my degree in clinical psychology, and I have no idea why we still study Freud. His ideas, views, and "science" is outdated and simply just wrong. Yeah, when he started his ideas were radical because society was sexually repressed, but it's not anymore. If we don't give people lobotomies or dunk them in ice cold water anymore, than why do we still recognize Freud as the "father of psychology". Don't like him or his theories.

[Suleiman · Rating 4 out of 5]

A pretty nice and concise introduction to Freud's psychoanalysis. Freud is notorious for having very fringe theories but outside of a few, I believe that they present an interesting insight into the mechanism of the human psyche. His stuff on Marx was interesting, he didn't really understand Marx's theory and his thoughts on the Bolshevik project was interesting considering the time he created these lectures.

[Moonromanticism]

even this is an old book and sigmund freud is already dead, i find it very interesting. it's the first book i'm reading about psycho analysis but i think there will follow others.. with this book he's giving me insight in a new subject and he explains it also with funny stories out of his life. it's fun to read and easy to understand

[Erik Graff · Rating 3 out of 5]

These lectures ostensibly continue those of the Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, published fifteen years previously, and may therefore read consecutively for some idea of the progress of Freud's thinking. I myself read them while studying continental depth psychology at Union Theological Seminary in New York.

[Zhiyar Qadri · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well I am taking a break from psychoanalysis for i don't know how long, used to be curious about how did person come out with such explanations!!! And the result is I am not a fan anymore.
Though if u like observing ideas and people who come up with crazy ideas you might like this book for the sake of those i cant deny that this man is a genius but he didn't get it well enough.

[Keo84 · Rating 1 out of 5]

Değerli Dostlar,
Psikanaliz ile ilgili okuduğum ilk kitap olduğundan pek yorum yapmak istemiyorum. Uzman arkadaşlarım lütfen dikkate almasınlar. Psikoloji-psikiyatri konularına ilgim olduğundan aldım okudum. Çok sıkıcı geldi ve bana pek bir şey katmadığını söyleyebilirim. Tek öğrendiğim şey, dil sürçmelerimizin altında bir takım psikolojik nedenler aramamız gerektiği idi.
Saygılar.