Doug wrote:
joanna bujes wrote:
I don't think you need psychoanalysis to observe that human beings
(uniquely among animals) go through a long, long period of
dependence.
No, but people not familiar with psychoanalysis would dismiss early
experience as irrelevant to adult thinking behavior -
I think that one of the reasons why capitalism righted itself in the rich
(imperialist) countries was the widening role of individualism in the culture. Though
I think that pschology should play a big role in our understanding of the human
condition under capitalism (and should have played a
Thanks Doug. I will look at what Judith Butler has
written on the subject mentioned in my questions. The
way you have summarized her views, they seem to mesh
pretty closely with my own readings and
interpretations of Freud, Reich, Fromm and Marcuse.
Cheers,
Mike B)
--- Doug Henwood [EMAIL
Bill Lear wrote:
So, our chains become part of us, and attempts to break the chains
therefore hurt?
They not only become part of us, they made us.
Doug
So, before the chains, there was nothing?
--
Yoshie
* Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/
* Calendars of Events in Columbus:
--- Bill Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday, February 9, 2004 at 10:28:36 (-0500) Doug
Henwood writes:
...
Or, if you want to take it further, there's Judith
Butler's argument
- rooted in that silly doctrine called
psychoanalysis - that subjects
are formed in subjection (through
--- Marvin Gandall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And if you want to take it even further -- that
capitalism has been able
to deliver, despite episodic crises, a modest but
steady improvement in
living standards and working conditions for the mass
of Western wage-
and salary-earners, despite
Mike Ballard wrote:
I see humans (and most humans are workers at this
stage in history) as having an instinct for freedom.
According to my reading of Freud, this instinct is
repressed in order to maintain civilization i.e.
whatever class society exists at the moment.
This was stated with much more
James Devine wrote:
most psychology -- including Freudian psychoanalysis -- is extremely
individualistic, especially in practice. Or it focuses on the behavior
and/or consciousness of the average person in society...
Kleinian psychoanalysis isn't individualistic if you mean by this has
little
Mike writes: I think that we see a lot of this immiseration
around us and in the world at large (just look at the
posts on PEN-L), if not on the sidewalks of urban
centres of cities without safety nets, where
capitalism's casualties push shopping carts full of
cans and clothes.
at least in CA,
I have nothing to contribute about the complexities of psychoanalysis,
but I do think that the subject bears some relevance here. I think that
different psychological types are drawn into specific political/economic
modes of reasoning.
We left economists had not been very successful in learning
I wrote:
most psychology -- including Freudian psychoanalysis -- is extremely
individualistic, especially in practice. Or it focuses on
the behavior
and/or consciousness of the average person in society...
Ted W. writes:
Kleinian psychoanalysis isn't individualistic if you mean
by
Mike Ballard wrote:
I see humans (and most humans are workers at this
stage in history) as having an instinct for
freedom.
According to my reading of Freud, this instinct is
repressed in order to maintain civilization i.e.
whatever class society exists at the moment.
--- Louis
--- Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Carrol Cox wrote:
1. What validity does psychoanalysis have? Answer:
[P]sychonalysis [is]
a mistake that grew into an imposture. Frederick
C. Crews, Preface to
_Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend_,
ed. Frederick Crews
(New York:
andie nachgeborenen wrote:
I
don't want to get into the details, but this is not
just a blow-off opinion. There is depth and thought
behind it. jks
Neither do I; the topic is not really suitable for e-list discussion.
But in fact all _positive_ references to psychoanalysis on e-lists
_also_
joanna bujes wrote:
You need to explain why psychonalysis is an obvious mistake before we
can take up the issue of its noxious influence.
It all depends. If somebody finds it helpful in writing about French
symbolist poetry, who can object? However, as science it is completely
bogus. At the worst,
Message-
From: joanna bujes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sun 2/8/2004 8:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Psychoanalysis Re: happiness is a transitory state
Carrol Cox wrote
Mike Ballard wrote:
Why *don't* the proles revolt? After all, capitalism
is way past its use-by date by now. That's
demonstrated on this list daily by the countless,
excellent news articles posted.
Could this condition originate in a conservative
psychological character structure rooted in the
Carrol Cox wrote:
Neither do I; the topic is not really suitable for e-list discussion.
But in fact all _positive_ references to psychoanalysis on e-lists
_also_ consist of blow-off opinions, since they always take the
validity of psychoanalysis for granted. Occasionally I merely like to
signal
On Monday, February 9, 2004 at 10:28:36 (-0500) Doug Henwood writes:
...
Or, if you want to take it further, there's Judith Butler's argument
- rooted in that silly doctrine called psychoanalysis - that subjects
are formed in subjection (through deference to authority figures,
like parents, and
Mike Ballard wrote:
Why *don't* the proles revolt? After all, capitalism
is way past its use-by date by now. That's
demonstrated on this list daily by the countless,
excellent news articles posted.
Could this condition originate in a conservative
psychological character structure rooted
Bill Lear wrote:
So, our chains become part of us, and attempts to break the chains
therefore hurt?
They not only become part of us, they made us.
Doug
Bill Lear wrote:
So, our chains become part of us, and attempts to break the chains
therefore hurt?
They not only become part of us, they made us.
Doug
Very true, but does the fact that we can conceptualize and grasp that we
are partly the product of the chains and backwardness that bind us
No, following the Frankfurt School, the search for the "good father" produces
submissiveness (a.ka. false consciousness), a desire to be protected from
external threatening forces (Bush's invocation of terrorists), and rage at
anyone who would end the possibility of repairing the damage
So, should the decline of the British empire have been predicted
because Brits are subjects? I always marveled that Brits were willing
to be so described.
Gene Coyle
Doug Henwood wrote:
Mike Ballard wrote:
Why *don't* the proles revolt? After all, capitalism
is way past its use-by date by
Doug Henwood wrote:
Or, if you want to take it further, there's Judith Butler's argument
- rooted in that silly doctrine called psychoanalysis - that subjects
are formed in subjection (through deference to authority figures,
like parents, and their successors, like language and law), and that
joanna bujes wrote:
Psychonalysis, in its more radical forms, helps the patient become aware
of this conditioning. Its goal (like that of Buddhism) is to enable the
subject to be fully present. This full presence is not something that is
achieved once and for all, but a practice of awareness that
Louis Proyect wrote:
You mean the neurotic is not adjusted to one of the most maladjusted
societies since the dawn of civilization? Much of the time I feel like
Alan Bates in The King of Hearts anyhow.
No. I never said anything about adjustment. I was speaking about one's
ability to be present:
joanna bujes wrote:
No. I never said anything about adjustment. I was speaking about one's
ability to be present: to present injustice, to present beauty, to
present poverty, to present uglyness, to present stupidity... I said
that the neurotic is unable to experience the present.
I have no idea
joanna bujes wrote:
I don't think you need psychoanalysis to observe that human beings
(uniquely among animals) go through a long, long period of dependence.
No, but people not familiar with psychoanalysis would dismiss early
experience as irrelevant to adult thinking behavior - just like
Surely this is not an either or proposition. Precisely because we are
dealing with a social problem, it is incumbent upon us to examine from
as many different perspectives as possible, why they don't react the way
we prescribe.
Joel Blau
Louis Proyect wrote:
joanna bujes wrote:
No. I never
Joel Kovel, Stanley Aronowitz and other left figures have written about their "breakdowns" in their early books. . .stuck in that limbo abyss between the official views practices of the world (psychoanalysis with Kovel, the union movement with Aronowitz) and their emergent selves. . .many of us
Craven, Jim wrote:
Very true, but does the fact that we can conceptualize and grasp that we
are partly the product of the chains and backwardness that bind us not
suggest the possibility of transcendence or at least of not accepting
such chains as limits or a fait accompli?
Absolutely. If I
Joel Blau wrote:
Surely this is not an either or proposition. Precisely because we are
dealing with a social problem, it is incumbent upon us to examine from
as many different perspectives as possible, why they don't react the way
we prescribe.
By all means. I myself took prozac about six years
Doug Henwood wrote:
It's very interesting that some of PEN-L's most anti-Freudian posters
act out their psychopathology on the Internet every day.
It is also interesting to note that some reformists don't have the guts
to defend their ideas on PEN-L and prefer to make personal snipes at
people
Joel Blau wrote:
Surely this is not an either or proposition. Precisely because we are
dealing with a social problem, it is incumbent upon us to examine from
as many different perspectives as possible, why they don't react the way
we prescribe.
In a panel on Psychoanalysis Politics at 2001 (?)
In a message dated 2/9/04 2:57:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It has been
observed time and again how those recruited young and innocent to radical
groups have defected once they felt the force of tradition.
I know and quote this passage routinely, Doug (hey, out there,
And if you want to take it even further -- that capitalism has been able
to deliver, despite episodic crises, a modest but steady improvement in
living standards and working conditions for the mass of Western wage-
and salary-earners, despite Marx's belief that it had exhausted its
historic
Please, sniping of all sorts does not belong here.
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 02:52:08PM -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:
Doug Henwood wrote:
It's very interesting that some of PEN-L's most anti-Freudian posters
act out their psychopathology on the Internet every day.
It is also interesting to
There are two questions about psychoanalysis. The first one has been
answered pretty decisively. The second one has not been answered yet and
needs to be explored much more than it has been.
1. What validity does psychoanalysis have? Answer: [P]sychonalysis [is]
a mistake that grew into an
Carrol Cox wrote:
1. What validity does psychoanalysis have? Answer: [P]sychonalysis [is]
a mistake that grew into an imposture. Frederick C. Crews, Preface to
_Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend_, ed. Frederick Crews
(New York: Viking, 1998), p. ix.
Well that settles it! Next
Carrol Cox wrote:
There are two questions about psychoanalysis. The first one has been
answered pretty decisively. The second one has not been answered yet and
needs to be explored much more than it has been.
1. What validity does psychoanalysis have? Answer: [P]sychonalysis [is]
a mistake that
Crews has a LOT more to say one the subject, most of
it which struck me as pretty sensible when I read it.
And congruent with what other perhaps more sympathetic
critics, like Adolph Grunbaum, have had to say. I
don't want to get into the details, but this is not
just a blow-off opinion. There is
42 matches
Mail list logo
