Thoughts on Freud Essay Sample

In contrast. my ain personal belief system has been rooted in 50 old ages of life’s many tests and trials. callings. love and loss. academic accomplishment and religious consciousness. I intend to utilize this paradigm. my beliefs in contrast to Freud’s. as a point of entry to discourse briefly my positions on the Freudian concept of spirituality/religion. and mourning.

Merely as it is impossible for us to cognize once and for all. whether God exists and what He is like unless He takes the enterprise and reveals Himself. which He has non. It is preciously in position of that fact or my analysis of that fact ; that Freud’s claims on decease. and mourning vis-a-vis. his apprehension of spirituality/religion seem to make peculiar pandemonium in my head. Specifically. I will utilize my work as a religious practician to assist to juxtapose my place. I will turn to the illustration of Freud’s theory on mourning and decease utilizing his work Mourning and Melancholia. ( Strachey. 1915 )

Surely. the early work of Freud was explorative and much of Freud’s work was developing hypotheses that sought some proof in grounds. Given that. what precisely were Freud’s constructs or hypotheses about mourning and decease? Freud’s hypothesis of bereavement is in response to loss. Mourning he concludes is a procedure which must be conducted over clip. along with procedures affecting the gradual transmutation and development or recovery of the person. ( Strachey. 1916 ) Freud’s hypothesis of decease carried with it a great Manichaean constituent that he interpreted though out his life as being an ageless struggle of two distinct and wholly opponent forces. one seeking to continue and widen life. the other seeking to cut down life to the inorganic province out of which it arose. ( Brown. 1959 )

His hypothesis was truly a conceptual belief that one must work through powerful feelings in order to detach from the deceased. reinvest in life. and retrieve from and decide the loss. ( Strachey. 1914 ) At a conceptual degree. I think Freud’s theory that we become emotionally attached to our loved 1s by puting in them is true. At a scientific degree. Freud theorized that nervus cells gain or lose this energy. accounting for alterations in their sensitiveness. In Dr. Watson’s composing from his book The Appreciation Theory of Grieving he suggest Freud’s impression of attaching and detaching is similar to chemical bonding. in which atoms attach to one another by energetic bonds. and go detached by reactions such as in combustion. ( Watson. 1994 )

Under Freud’s hypothesis. mourning consists of break uping emotional fond regards by retreating our energetic investings. ( Strachey. 1915 ) Even though Freud has laid out some concrete. scientific stairss for mourning – organizing fond regards “cathexis. ” or the detaching procedure “decathexis. ” are the completion of these stairss direct cogent evidence? I believe this hypothesis of Freud’s leads to the feeling that he did non construe worlds as being capable of doing intending for themselves without any direct cogent evidence. In dissension. with Freud’s hypothesis of necessitating direct cogent evidence. one could reason that individuals with whom religious and spiritual beliefs are changeless and feasible do non necessitate any direct or immediate consciousness of cogent evidence. There seems to be no room for spiritual or religious worlds within Freud’s position. A quotation mark from Totem and Taboo gives visible radiation to the position of faith Freud saw “Religious beliefs are untrusty and non to be accepted” ( Freud. 1950 ) .

There are several elements within Freud’s work which combined reveal. his personal restrictions. First. allow us see Freud’s hypothesis of transference. and utilize his strong emotions of projection and name him Buddha. Next. allow us link the opposition of alteration with Freud’s belief system about “religion was crude and out-of-date. ” ( Strachey. 1915 ) As a concluding point. allow us convey into drama Freud’s manifestation of loss as his look of hankering to return to the uterus. My decision is that Freud’s religious and emotional stableness are narrow. In my judgement Freud was non willing to encompass spiritualty because he lacked the true capacity to understand it. What I mean is that the apprehension. which comes from one’s ain religious sense enables one to cognize that in all of us what will last of us is love. Freud in contrast was busy seeking to do life harder so it had to be by making constructs that were unquantifiable and making his ain linguistic communication that many could non understand. Understanding love can non be measured in a success checklist. In Freud theories. I see stiff divides that exists between the religious and Freud’s patterns of psychological science vis-a-vis organic structure and psyche.

Within the last decennary my work as a religious practician both in and out of institutionalised spiritual circles has allowed me to hold penetrations into a religious belief system that moves beyond philistinism. rational beliefs. and scientific theory. I have witnessed infinite human existences learn there is no demand for exact measurings to encompass thoughts such as religion. the psyche. the head. feelings of love and other internal phenomenon. Possibly it was the period that Freud lived in or his preparation in medical specialty or his involvement in Darwinism or his fancy for Goethe that made his positions so unusually in contrast to mine. I really think it was none of those. What I genuinely perceive it to be. honestly. was his self-love. Freud’s ego absorbed. idolism of ego. both motivated his appraisal and drove his interventions to hold room merely for exact psychological and precise medical points of position. cut downing his intervention in every facet to a biological. cellular. experiment.

Mentions

Brown. N. O. . . ( 1959 ) . Life against decease ; the psychoanalytical significance of history. Middletown. Conn. : Wesleyan University Press.

Frankland. G. ( 2000 ) . Freud’s literary civilization. Cambridge. UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Freud. S. . . ( 1952 ) . Totem and tabu ; some points of understanding between the mental lives of barbarians and mental cases. New York: Norton.

Freud. S. . Strachey. J. . Freud. A. . Rothgeb. C. L. . Richards. A. . & A ; Scientific Literature Corporation. ( 1900 ) . The standard edition of the complete psychological plants of sigmund Freud. London: Hogarth Press.

Mourning and Melancholia V XIV ( 1914-1916 ) .

Beyond the pleasance rule V XI ( 1914-1916 ) .

Watson. D. E. . . ( 1994 ) . Surviving your crises. resuscitating your dreams. Bedford. Ma: Mills & A ; Sanderson.