Hi Professor. This is not the right video for my comment, but anyway, I want to thank you for absolutely, amazingly clear and understandable way you teach. You made me ACTUALLY learn calculus and linear algebra. I hope you will add statistics course in the future :)) Please keep up great work. People who cannot afford to spend money on expensive education need teachers like you.
Freud was an applied philosopher. He thought up his ideas and then went about trying to shoehorn 'evidence' into his already developed idea. His only value was taking psychology in the vague direction of science. I read Freud's books on dreams. Interesting ideas, but over and over the refrain of "how do you know that?" echoes in my head.
philosophy isn’t just “thinking up” ideas. Good philosophy tries to understand the conditions of knowledge, the conditions of truth, of receiving sense information, and so on. Even “grounded theory” or empiricist philosophies still presuppose much about epistemology and metaphysics.
I feel like Freud’s biggest contribution to modern psychology is that everybody was so determined to prove him wrong that they actually came up with good ideas.
I am a psychology student from Ghana and here's my question How true is it that Anna O opposed any use of psychoanalytic treatment because she didn't believe that really helped her recover from conversion disorder? Please I need clarification on this
I learned to distance myself from the Freudian vision of the human psyche. He jump-started the whole clinical psychology field and that was a good thing, but his original vision was very raw and - I think - quickly outdated by the works of Carl Jung and many other brilliant minds that came after. I have the feeling Freud himself wasn't a very nice guy, he ironically lacked empathy and was full of himself.
@@RichardKoenigsberg Hello, many trained psychiatrist today believes in the DSM-5. I used to, paid my price, figured it out and corrected my perspective. All is well, repaired for me and many of my friends. The DSM is a scientific story, evolving. What makes you think it is forever as is? Don't you want to help moving forward like me, you know, one step at a time? Help create V6 and the next ones? I meet some trained psychologists on Monday, I think I can help at my humble level, as a recovering "desaxed". I believe we all can if we choose to help, ourselves and others as equals, to grow together with less pain for longer (and in a way, forever). Bye 👍☮️🙇🖐️
Bro Carl Jung said read Frued and Adler before you read him. We are animals and he spoke more about other things than sex. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
The criticism of Freud's work being Eurocentric and having little or no application to human populations with very different social traditions and attitudes has some merit, I suspect.
@@AttilatheNun-xv6kcNo, you can’t criticise someone for coming up with original thought. What wa the last world changing, mind challenging, epoch questioning new mode of thought that you came up with?
Hey Dave, I just wanted to let you know that I'm getting Prager U advertisements before your videos every hour. Pretty sure content creators can ban specific advertisers, I'm not sure if it's something you want to do, but I figured I would leave this comment here
Thanks, this was interesting. I think it would be useful to note that freud's ideas changed during the course of his career. He outlined the function of the Id, ego and super-ego in later writings. What interests me is how these are quite close to CBT. He saw fantasy and the Id as distorting a client's perception of reality. The aim of psychoanalysis became lessening these distortions.
@@RichardKoenigsberg Um, physics and psychology do not share the same level of empirical rigor, bud. Go ahead and make a case for debunked Freudian beliefs being the same as relativity. I could use a good laugh.
JT is a different topic, and better to comment on the JT video rather than muddy the clear waters here. We see loads of unrelated comments appearing here and are like a fish out of water. They are no help to a new student /viewer seeking info about Sigmoid Fraud. In the best interest of the channel, I recommend that the good Doctor Discbusters move the comment to the correct video; thanks for your accurate assessment and contribution.
Dave, you continue to surprise me when it comes to your research and way of delivering content to us, that's why I've been a long-time viewer of yours. As a psychologyst myself, just wanted to point out one little thing that might concern the content you've so magestfully brought us today. The Electra Complex is NOT a Freudian idea nor is it mentioned in any freudian text; it is a junguian ideia. What we will find, whowever, is Freud referring to the girl's side of the Oedipux Complex as the Feminine Oedipus. (I'm not quite sure how it is named in English, I've read Freud in portuguese for my whole life since I'm brazilian.) That said, there's only one thing that has not been explained in this video and I think is essencial for discussing Freud's ideias. That being the word "sexual" in his theory. That word has a whole different meaning when we're looking through psychoanalysis lens. Sexual and sexuality are two different concepts. Sexual means: "everything that can bring you pleasure", sexuality is, more preciseley, the stages and every thought that happens in each and every stage. That's why we call it the "psychosexual theory". This is largely covered in his book "Three Essays on the Therory of Sexuality" (1905). That's why it can sound a little outstanding to the average viewer knowing that the child "discovers" masturbation. That concept is intrinsic to the sexual concept. That's a way to create tension and then remove said tension. Another little thing is that the phallic stage is not centered in the genitals; it is, however, centered in the genital AREA. This stage is called "phallic" stage due to the concept of the "phallus" far too complex to fit in a TH-cam comment. The genital stage is, of course, centered around the genitals. About the "heteronormative" affirmation towards the end, you're correct. Though Freud explained that as his concept of "inversion" and it is NOT a sexual aberration. The way he goes about it is saying that everything regarding sex that's not going to reproduce the species is a "perversion". Knowing that, we can confidently say that oral sex, for exemple, is a form of perversion. Of course we'd need to discuss perversion as whole, but for now, that's just a little bit of extra information. These are some of Freud's texts that can help us understand a little bit more about what I said. Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905); Remembering, Repeating and Working-Through (1914); On Narcissism: An Introduction (1914); Instincs and their vicissitudes (1915); The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex (1924); Thank you so much for this video, I really appreciate your work and everything you bring to the table. You're amazing.
. "Psychoanalysis is a futile exercise because it changes nothing: it does not create a new man, it does not bring peace to you. In fact even the founders of psychoanalysis like Sigmund Freud were so much afraid of death that you cannot believe it. No normal being is so afraid of death. The founder of psychoanalysis was so afraid that even the word “death” was not to be pronounced in front of him - it was taboo. It was not to be talked about. Three times it had happened that somebody mentioned death and Sigmund Freud fell in a swoon, in a fit, became unconscious. He was so afraid of death that he avoided going to any cemetery, he avoided going to anybody who was dying, even a friend or disciple. Wherever there was anything concerning death he was absolutely panicked - and this man gives you psychoanalysis! His problems are not solved. He gets angry just like anybody else. He is jealous, more jealous than anybody else. He is greedy. He wants to monopolize, he wants to dominate people. He creates almost an empire of psychoanalysts around the world, but everybody has to repeat like parrots whatever he says. Anybody who says anything different is immediately expelled. It seems it is not science but a political party or a fanatic religion - not scientific research. And the same is true about Jung. Jung came to India to meet someone… because in the East people have been working on the mind for thousands of years. But they have never developed anything like psychoanalysis; they developed meditation - a totally different approach. What is the use of analyzing the rubbish of the mind? - sorting it out… it takes years. There are people who have been in psychoanalysis for fifteen years and they have reached nowhere. They have changed their psychoanalyst in the hope that perhaps somebody else will help, but they have not reached anywhere else. They cannot, because all that psychoanalysis does - all the schools, whether Adlerian or Jungian or Freudian - is to sort out the rubbish of your mind, interpret it according to their minds. And what is the point of it all? In the East we have not developed psychoanalysis, we have developed meditation. Meditation simply takes you away from the garbage, takes you beyond the garbage - it is not worth bothering about. And if you want to bother about it you can go on bothering for lives. You will not come to an end. But just being a witness to your mind, without doing anything to the mind - just being aloof, just seeing it as if thoughts are moving on a screen and simply watching it without any judgment of good and bad - a strange experience happens: thoughts slowly start disappearing. Soon a moment comes when there is only an empty screen - no thoughts. And when there is no object, no thought for your consciousness, it turns back upon itself because there is nothing preventing it; that is exactly the meaning of the word ‘object’ - it prevents, it objects. When there is no object the consciousness goes… and just as everything moves in circles in existence, consciousness also moves in a circle. It comes back upon its own source. And the meeting of the consciousness with its own source is the explosion of light, the greatest celebration that a man is capable of, the greatest orgasmic experience. And it is not something that happens and is finished. No, once it has happened, it continues. It remains with you. It becomes almost like your breathing. You live in it twenty-four hours a day. Jung had come to India in search of someone, to find out what the East has done to create so many people like Gautam Buddha - not one but hundreds who have gone beyond mind and all its troubles and problems, worries, anxieties. What is the secret? He was going to universities, meeting psychoanalysts, and everywhere he was told, “You are wasting your time. These people are not the right people. These people have gone to the West to learn psychoanalysis and they are teaching psychoanalysis in the universities. You have come to search and seek somebody who is absolutely untouched by the West. And there is a man.” And there was a man - Shri Raman Maharshi. Wherever Jung went - and he was there for three months - everywhere the same name was given to him. “Go to Arunachal in South India and meet this man who is uneducated, who knows nothing of psychoanalysis; he is the man the East has been able to produce. Just go and sit with him and talk with him and listen to him. If you have some questions, ask him.” But you will be surprised: Jung never went there. And later on, feeling that he will be criticized, Jung wrote, “I consideredly did not go to Raman Maharshi because the East has its own way, the West has its own way, and they should not be mixed” - just to protect himself from criticism. Then why did he go to India at all? He was told again and again to go to a man who was available, which is rare, and he did not go there, although he went up to Madras, from where it was only a two hour journey to Arunachal! Jung did not go to the man, whom just by meeting he would have seen how a clear man is, how a man is who has cleaned his mind completely - his eyes, his gestures, his words, his authority. He does not quote scriptures, he knows himself. Jung did not go there, and he himself felt guilty. To defend himself he started writing that the East and the West have different ways. This is nonsense, because man - whether in the East or in the West - is the same. And it is strange that he was teaching Eastern students Western psychology. He should have refused because this is mixing East and West. If he was really honest then he should have said, “You go back to the East.” He was teaching Eastern students Western psychology, but he was not ready to go to an Eastern meditator, just to meet him. What is the fear? The fear is that Jung is as normal a person as you are - just knowledgeable. He has gathered from books, but he has no authentic experience of his own. Western psychoanalysis is just a business. It is cheating people. It is simply exploiting people without any help, and because there is no other alternative people have to go to it. The psychoanalysts themselves go to other psychoanalysts. And psychoanalysts go mad more than any other profession! They commit suicide more than any other profession; they are more perverted in every way than any other profession. It is a very strange phenomenon. It is not a science at all, it is just a fiction. But it has become a big profession."
Was at a store selling cigars, and the tag line for one of the brands was "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar--this isn't." My guys, did you really not have a single person in the marketing department who knew that y'all are suggesting your cigars are a phallus?
Sigmund Freud was a nutty coke head. His drug habits were pretty amazing, and he wrote a lot about his medicinal use of cocaine and many of the other substances available in pharmacies in the 19th Century. It's absolutely fascinating reading. Not sure how it is in the States, but clinical psychologists in Australia are dangerously under qualified (as well as dangerously inaccessible). Many have an overtly prescriptive style of "therapy" that work for some, but sets most up for failure. Medical psychotherapy - so, an actual doctor - is a FAR more constructive approach. Divorcing mind and body is a BIG mistake, and clinical psychologists' ignorance of physiology makes them further inefficacious. But the big issue is access; the public healthcare system won't provide any more than ten sessions with a clinical psychologist and NONE with a psychiatrist or psychotherapist (though, they are subsidised), thus leaving assessment and prescribing in the hands of general practitioners, who obviously don't have any specialised training in psychiatry. It's pathetic. How does someone in the States access free mental health ca- ... whoops, ah, never mind. Where did you hang the graphene gift from James Tour?
Sounds like his partiality towards stimulants is similar to academics today with caffeine. I'm sure if coke was readily available and not stigmatized similar to Freud's time, it would be just as popular so cant really hold that against him. The problem with the medical approach to treating psychological conditions is it relies too much on medicine as a remedy, which we are learning more and more can be detrimental to one's overall health in the long term. Its useful for treating symptoms, just like painkillers are useful for alleviating inflammation for example, but taking painkillers every day for years takes a toll on your body and inflammation can be alleviated holistically which is much better for the long term. The same goes for the majority of psychological conditions.
Professor Dave, I came in this comment section to address you about the transgender issue with Mr. Matt Walsh. I would like to say that video was very elucidating to me, as I really wanted to hear someone like you talk about, specifically, the majority of talking points in that video. That also made me realize how important is to create and engage in debate (with science) with the group which dominates mass media and, therefore, the government. I am really thankful for your videos, as I am an older follower but have recently been targeted with your videos. And I am really enjoying them. Cheers from Brazil!
Professor, if you read this, as a fellow teacher please don’t stop with 120 year old psychiatry. To start with Psychology as opposed to with the ideas of a medical physician, start with William James. Yes, all should know a bit of Freud since his terminology is used to this day. However, today’s psychology (not psychiatry) in the form of cognitive behavioral psychology and emotional intelligence is as far away from Freud as Galileo is from Ptolemy. You teach facts. If you mean to teach Psychology, please differentiate between the field as it is in the 21st century and the history of psychological ideas-for which we can go back to the Greeks. Summarizing CBT and explaining EI would be of enormous, immediate, pragmatic benefit to your viewers.
Why do we use a science based method, wich requires group study’s and research based approached, for assessing specific individuals who may not have specific symptoms. My professor hasn’t gotten to me.
@@RichardKoenigsberg People are animals and animals have those instincts so of course its gonna exist, its what keeps our species alive. But Freud's theory of psychosexual development is patently absurd even psychologists don't take it seriously
In the best interest of the channel, may I recommend you move this good comment to the correct video so it keeps this one on the subject of Siggy Fraud? Thanks for your interest and contribution.
This video on Sigmund Freud and psychoanalysis is fantastic! 🎥 The deep dive into Freud’s theories and the foundational concepts of clinical psychology is incredibly insightful. If you’re interested in exploring the depths of the human mind and understanding the roots of psychoanalytic theory, this is a must-watch! If you enjoyed this video, make sure to check out my channel, Mindful Horizons, where I dive into similar topics in psychology and consciousness. Your support helps me create more engaging audio and video content! 🌟 #ClinicalPsychology #SigmundFreud #Psychoanalysis #MindfulHorizons
so if I'm understanding this correctly, Freud believed that girls desired their fathers, but realized they could never have them because they didn't have a penis, and then blamed their mother because they don't have a penis. what the hell was this dude on?
My study background is a bachelor's in Computer science and now I am studying a master's in cognitive science with a specialization in cognitive psychology and neuroscience. I took some technical classes too but I enjoyed these two majors so much and in the future, I want to work as a clinical psychologist. My next plan is to do PhD as well from any German university. But every time I discuss this with any senior I get the same reply that I cannot be a clinical psychologist. Would you guide me on what should i do or any other field I should search about if I can't be a clinical psychologist.?I just want a bright future i struggled a lot in finding my interest. And now I need help from seniors.
Before I began my psychology degree, I read extensively about Freud’s theories. Alas, Freud wasn’t even mentioned. Behaviourism was said to be the essence of psychology. Of minor interest only.
In 1960 the did prove the super Ed go development of women. Most all psychoanalysisst agree with Freud. Freud never accepted the "Electra" complex theory. Thats from Jung.
This is splendid presentation. The denial of psychosexual development is more based on barriers of some groups. The reason is however at the individual level: we cannot see or we dont want to see our backgrounds. It is important theory and obvious to everyone, who can follow children.
Another important and underexplained bit of Freudian history is his original "Seduction Hypothesis", which is basically the concept that all mental illness is because of repressed memories of CSA, prior to his development of the Psychosexual stages. Basically, he swung from believing everyone had been abused as children and were unaware of it, to a theory that all children fantasize about sexual activities with caregivers. It's a controversial and heavily argued area, but it gives some needed context.
Just the way that licensure works in the United States, a clinical psychologist unfortunately is the last person to provide psychotherapy in most areas. Clinical psych people go through extensive psychometric training, and a lot of them do nothing but administer standardized tests. Psychotherapy tends to be more frequently delivered by social workers and people with an MS or MA in psychology, rather than by a clinical psychologist per se. A person cannot practice as a psychologist in the United States unless they have a doctorate. In my little part of the world, for instance, we have dozens of psychology trained psychotherapists and several more dozen social workers who deliver psychotherapy. And we have two clinical psych people, and they do nothing but diagnose and give assessments. In theory, clinical psychology is the discipline that examines this material, but in practice, psychotherapy actually comes from counseling departments and from social work departments. And of course medical school where psychiatrists are trained.
Assessments and diagnosis and administering standardized tests are far more lucrative than psychotherapy, too. If you do assessments for ADHD and autism, you will make three or four times as much each day as you would if you are delivering psychotherapy sessions. I think money pushes clinical psych people away from psychotherapy.
I will also note that clinical psych people occupy the lowest rung of the APA. The APA values researchers and professors and organizations, it promotes research and gives awards to researchers, and it ignores and talks down to people who actually have face to face contact with patients or clients. It has been this way in psychology for a long time. Research is high value, and clinical interactions are an afterthought in psychology. Another way to look at this is: 95% of people in psychology are engaged in clinical work, and the message they get from the APA is that they don't matter. Clinical psych doesn't really get a lot of respect in the professional organizations. This is why counseling and social workers separated from psychology decades ago.
Maternal Masculinity Complex *This is a self-published theory based on the absurd theories of Freud’s Electra Complex and Oedipus Complex.* Boys without father figures often don't experience the Oedipus complex. Instead, they tend to look up to the strongest figure in their life, which is usually their mother. As a result, they may develop aversion towards their own masculinity and experience negative emotions influenced by their mother, especially if she holds feminist beliefs. Consequently, they strive to adopt a false sense of masculinity modeled after their mother, rather than building a solid understanding of genuine masculinity. Since there isn't a strong male figure to fear and emulate, they try to become the female figure they admire, rather than learning from and feeling jealous of a father's gender traits.
I had a great friend whose brother knew Freud = an internationally renowned psychoanalytic family, famous etc. At the same time [= 80's] I knew a psychiatric patient who put her baby on the living-room fire: she said Satan appeared and absolutely terrified her, but tell that to an atheist shrink and incarceration follows: hence, claiming post-natal depression, she was free to go after 6 weeks. Similarly, I was called to see an acquaintance who sat catatonic in his own excrement & whose wife explained that during an acid trip [= LSD25] Satan came thru' the wall and her husband shit himself in fear. Not long afterwards she set herself and her house on fire and perished. Having taken up Freud's poisoned chalice [= someone is required to do for the psychoses what he did for the neuroses], I suggest psychology graduates, trainee psychoanalysts etc obtain a grimoire and force a demon to appear. Alas, they might find demonry intensely active in psychotics and suffer the consequences, such as vicious hatred, palpable evil, unbelievable nastiness, serious violence etc that even £200 per hour won't compensate for. Have fun!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Ah ok. Will you ever make a series focusing entirely on Freud himself or entirely on psychoanalysis? If not, are there any syllabus or documentaries that you would recommend on that subject?
I remember studying Freud back at Uni 30 years ago and how Freud's theories freaked everyone out, especially women. I still hold him in high regard, generally speaking in a round about way he was spot on. You simply cannot study psychology without studying Freud and that means a lot.
I remember hearing at a university lecture something to the effect that Freud was sometimes right for the right reasons, sometimes right for the wrong reasons and sometimes wrong for really interesting reasons.
The lecturer was making the point that some of Freud's conclusions have been found to be on a firm foundation; others may indeed be correct but not for the reasons Freud advanced; and some are plain wrong but the reasoning which led to those wrong conclusions has been found to be interesting in itself. Which specific conclusions fit which particular categories I can't say now. All this was a long time ago.
It's crazy how much of psychoanalysis and psychology in general has proven about 20 years later to be absolute nonsense. Phrenology, everything Freud did, lobotomies, somatotypes, repressed memories... the list goes on. But I'm totally sure we've got it right this time, and our current psychological beliefs are definitely not just the ravings of a madman with an unhealthy obsession with kids.
Freud was, arguably, the most groundbreaking leader of their particular subject of ANY field. Without him we wouldn’t be anywhere near where we are in the field of psychology and psychiatry. I can’t think of another field where one person has had as much influence as Freud did on his related fields.
@@dRoy8364 You just made me laugh out loud, thanks. In the broad field of Psychology how about the impact of Carl Jung or Donald Meichenbaum? The latter is hardly known to the public, but he and those like-minded from the 1970’s onward revolutionized modern clinical psychology and from there all clinical psychotherapy. Donald didn’t talk about sex but the mind . Guess that’s why he’s little known.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains No - Freud was influenced first by Charcoal - and then by Breuer, - & what was then diagnosed as hysteria. The first book - "Studies on Hysteria" 1895. Oh, so what. carry on with the series everything else is fine.
@@damedusa5107 Hysteria is the result of a psychological defence mechanism of conversion, - not a mental illness ( like schizophrenia or bipolar mood disorder) But, it is not a big deal ...
@Daiku Coffee actions and behaviours are determined by a lot of factors. There are some mechanisms that resemble every living being on our planet, such as the need to reproduce. However, to state that those needs are the main ones we should focus on when it comes to behaviour, It is still an oversimplification. There reasons to why, to become a clinical psychologist, you will need to study a 5 years course at a university. There is much more to it, and it is so fascinating! 😉👍
Did Freud "come up" with the ideas of manifest content and latent content as hypotheses, and then investigated their existence, or did he...assume these were correct, and went on from there?
he just tried stuff and if it "worked" on some patients he assumed they were correct. He had the most random approaches, for example in a writing he just casually drops a line like: "so at this point I applied the head-pushing method, which i explained in another book, but basically im applying pressure on the patients head to trigger some response"
![[UNCUT] “บอสณวัฒน์” ลากไส้!! ใครหนุนหลัง "แม่ตั๊ก ป๋าเบียร์" I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 30 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QlD7mU2KKRk/mqdefault.jpg)
I think he was brilliant, legendary. Way ahead of our time and he pushed and pushes boundaries others are still unwilling to address.
he was a vile sickening and disgusting man,he persuaded sexually abused kids to believe it was all in their heads
Hi Professor. This is not the right video for my comment, but anyway, I want to thank you for absolutely, amazingly clear and understandable way you teach. You made me ACTUALLY learn calculus and linear algebra. I hope you will add statistics course in the future :))
Please keep up great work. People who cannot afford to spend money on expensive education need teachers like you.
Hello, fellow norwegian 8)
Freud was an applied philosopher. He thought up his ideas and then went about trying to shoehorn 'evidence' into his already developed idea. His only value was taking psychology in the vague direction of science.
I read Freud's books on dreams. Interesting ideas, but over and over the refrain of "how do you know that?" echoes in my head.
philosophy isn’t just “thinking up” ideas. Good philosophy tries to understand the conditions of knowledge, the conditions of truth, of receiving sense information, and so on. Even “grounded theory” or empiricist philosophies still presuppose much about epistemology and metaphysics.
I feel like Freud’s biggest contribution to modern psychology is that everybody was so determined to prove him wrong that they actually came up with good ideas.
🤯
I enjoy your lessons a lot. I appreciate the depth and diversity of your content. This episode was especially digestible. Thanks.
If Sig went to a psychiatrist he would be diagnosed with a lot of things
What good scientist isn’t mad?
@@voiceunderthecovers ... a lot of things he invented, like his Oedipus Complex, envy, etc
@@RichardKoenigsberg he was pretty weird , probably had Penis Envy
In other words, king of overthinking, published..
I am a psychology student from Ghana and here's my question
How true is it that Anna O opposed any use of psychoanalytic treatment because she didn't believe that really helped her recover from conversion disorder?
Please I need clarification on this
Nothing on hysteria/trauma? I was quite looking forward to that part.
Was introduced to Freuds work in middle school, since then I’ve been different. 🤷🏾🤷🏾🤷🏾🤷🏾
How so?
I think Freud thought about sex more than me and that’s saying something.
I learned to distance myself from the Freudian vision of the human psyche. He jump-started the whole clinical psychology field and that was a good thing, but his original vision was very raw and - I think - quickly outdated by the works of Carl Jung and many other brilliant minds that came after. I have the feeling Freud himself wasn't a very nice guy, he ironically lacked empathy and was full of himself.
@@RichardKoenigsberg Hello, many trained psychiatrist today believes in the DSM-5. I used to, paid my price, figured it out and corrected my perspective. All is well, repaired for me and many of my friends.
The DSM is a scientific story, evolving.
What makes you think it is forever as is? Don't you want to help moving forward like me, you know, one step at a time? Help create V6 and the next ones?
I meet some trained psychologists on Monday, I think I can help at my humble level, as a recovering "desaxed".
I believe we all can if we choose to help, ourselves and others as equals, to grow together with less pain for longer (and in a way, forever).
Bye 👍☮️🙇🖐️
Bro Carl Jung said read Frued and Adler before you read him. We are animals and he spoke more about other things than sex. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
The criticism of Freud's work being Eurocentric and having little or no application to human populations with very different social traditions and attitudes has some merit, I suspect.
Of course it was raw, he was the pioneer
@@AttilatheNun-xv6kcNo, you can’t criticise someone for coming up with original thought. What wa the last world changing, mind challenging, epoch questioning new mode of thought that you came up with?
Before I even watched the video I can strongly recommend Sam O'Nella's educational video on Freud
Nice
They also cover Honey, Skinner, Jung as well?
The is amazing. I have this for my exam next week :)
Hey Dave, I just wanted to let you know that I'm getting Prager U advertisements before your videos every hour. Pretty sure content creators can ban specific advertisers, I'm not sure if it's something you want to do, but I figured I would leave this comment here
Interesting! I guess it’s fun for those morons to pay me.
Thanks, this was interesting. I think it would be useful to note that freud's ideas changed during the course of his career. He outlined the function of the Id, ego and super-ego in later writings. What interests me is how these are quite close to CBT. He saw fantasy and the Id as distorting a client's perception of reality. The aim of psychoanalysis became lessening these distortions.
Freud got things wrong, but what's amazing is just how much he got right, in his early years, simply working with a small amount of clients in Vienna.
Diagnosing ppl with catatonic schizophrenia for dreaming he's wrong? Not that great, as the label implies.
This could be useful for my upcoming exam. Thank you prof Dave!
I think Freud was a fraud, wtf did I just watch? 😂
He wasn't a fraud, he was a pioneer. He just also had some really weird and wrong beliefs.
Freud attained his revolutionary "insights" by getting high as a kite on cocaine. That tells you how valuable his theories are.
@@RichardKoenigsberg Um, physics and psychology do not share the same level of empirical rigor, bud. Go ahead and make a case for debunked Freudian beliefs being the same as relativity. I could use a good laugh.
@@RichardKoenigsberg Yeah, that's not relevant whatsoever, chief. It's the history of psychology.
I love how Dave absolutely demolished the flailing Tour, and now hes back to his regular videos like nothing happened.
Another way to jab him, by acting like nothing happened
Dave also apparently made a bad name for himself
@@celestialsatheist1535 in tour’s circle😂
@SS-rf1ri That was dave actually! He was discussing the discovery of Neptune on a flat earth debunk.
JT is a different topic, and better to comment on the JT video rather than muddy the clear waters here. We see loads of unrelated comments appearing here and are like a fish out of water. They are no help to a new student /viewer seeking info about Sigmoid Fraud.
In the best interest of the channel, I recommend that the good Doctor Discbusters move the comment to the correct video; thanks for your accurate assessment and contribution.
Always enjoyable and educational, thanks Dave !
I would bet Frueds weird and un scientific ideas came from his cocaine use. Hopefully you describe how his drug use impacted his ideas
@@RichardKoenigsberg Freud's cocaine use is well documented, although his admirers don't like to talk about it.
But most of their theories are not very scientific.
Dave, you continue to surprise me when it comes to your research and way of delivering content to us, that's why I've been a long-time viewer of yours. As a psychologyst myself, just wanted to point out one little thing that might concern the content you've so magestfully brought us today.
The Electra Complex is NOT a Freudian idea nor is it mentioned in any freudian text; it is a junguian ideia. What we will find, whowever, is Freud referring to the girl's side of the Oedipux Complex as the Feminine Oedipus. (I'm not quite sure how it is named in English, I've read Freud in portuguese for my whole life since I'm brazilian.)
That said, there's only one thing that has not been explained in this video and I think is essencial for discussing Freud's ideias. That being the word "sexual" in his theory. That word has a whole different meaning when we're looking through psychoanalysis lens. Sexual and sexuality are two different concepts. Sexual means: "everything that can bring you pleasure", sexuality is, more preciseley, the stages and every thought that happens in each and every stage. That's why we call it the "psychosexual theory". This is largely covered in his book "Three Essays on the Therory of Sexuality" (1905).
That's why it can sound a little outstanding to the average viewer knowing that the child "discovers" masturbation. That concept is intrinsic to the sexual concept. That's a way to create tension and then remove said tension.
Another little thing is that the phallic stage is not centered in the genitals; it is, however, centered in the genital AREA. This stage is called "phallic" stage due to the concept of the "phallus" far too complex to fit in a TH-cam comment. The genital stage is, of course, centered around the genitals.
About the "heteronormative" affirmation towards the end, you're correct. Though Freud explained that as his concept of "inversion" and it is NOT a sexual aberration. The way he goes about it is saying that everything regarding sex that's not going to reproduce the species is a "perversion". Knowing that, we can confidently say that oral sex, for exemple, is a form of perversion.
Of course we'd need to discuss perversion as whole, but for now, that's just a little bit of extra information.
These are some of Freud's texts that can help us understand a little bit more about what I said.
Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905);
Remembering, Repeating and Working-Through (1914);
On Narcissism: An Introduction (1914);
Instincs and their vicissitudes (1915);
The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex (1924);
Thank you so much for this video, I really appreciate your work and everything you bring to the table.
You're amazing.
Freud always claimed his use of cocaine was highly moderated. His preoccupation with sex makes me think it probably wasn't. Haha.
. "Psychoanalysis is a futile exercise because it changes nothing: it does not create a new man, it does not bring peace to you. In fact even the founders of psychoanalysis like Sigmund Freud were so much afraid of death that you cannot believe it. No normal being is so afraid of death.
The founder of psychoanalysis was so afraid that even the word “death” was not to be pronounced in front of him - it was taboo. It was not to be talked about. Three times it had happened that somebody mentioned death and Sigmund Freud fell in a swoon, in a fit, became unconscious. He was so afraid of death that he avoided going to any cemetery, he avoided going to anybody who was dying, even a friend or disciple. Wherever there was anything concerning death he was absolutely panicked - and this man gives you psychoanalysis!
His problems are not solved. He gets angry just like anybody else. He is jealous, more jealous than anybody else. He is greedy. He wants to monopolize, he wants to dominate people. He creates almost an empire of psychoanalysts around the world, but everybody has to repeat like parrots whatever he says. Anybody who says anything different is immediately expelled. It seems it is not science but a political party or a fanatic religion - not scientific research.
And the same is true about Jung. Jung came to India to meet someone… because in the East people have been working on the mind for thousands of years. But they have never developed anything like psychoanalysis; they developed meditation - a totally different approach.
What is the use of analyzing the rubbish of the mind? - sorting it out… it takes years. There are people who have been in psychoanalysis for fifteen years and they have reached nowhere. They have changed their psychoanalyst in the hope that perhaps somebody else will help, but they have not reached anywhere else. They cannot, because all that psychoanalysis does - all the schools, whether Adlerian or Jungian or Freudian - is to sort out the rubbish of your mind, interpret it according to their minds. And what is the point of it all?
In the East we have not developed psychoanalysis, we have developed meditation. Meditation simply takes you away from the garbage, takes you beyond the garbage - it is not worth bothering about. And if you want to bother about it you can go on bothering for lives. You will not come to an end.
But just being a witness to your mind, without doing anything to the mind - just being aloof, just seeing it as if thoughts are moving on a screen and simply watching it without any judgment of good and bad - a strange experience happens: thoughts slowly start disappearing. Soon a moment comes when there is only an empty screen - no thoughts. And when there is no object, no thought for your consciousness, it turns back upon itself because there is nothing preventing it; that is exactly the meaning of the word ‘object’ - it prevents, it objects.
When there is no object the consciousness goes… and just as everything moves in circles in existence, consciousness also moves in a circle. It comes back upon its own source. And the meeting of the consciousness with its own source is the explosion of light, the greatest celebration that a man is capable of, the greatest orgasmic experience.
And it is not something that happens and is finished. No, once it has happened, it continues. It remains with you. It becomes almost like your breathing. You live in it twenty-four hours a day.
Jung had come to India in search of someone, to find out what the East has done to create so many people like Gautam Buddha - not one but hundreds who have gone beyond mind and all its troubles and problems, worries, anxieties. What is the secret? He was going to universities, meeting psychoanalysts, and everywhere he was told, “You are wasting your time. These people are not the right people. These people have gone to the West to learn psychoanalysis and they are teaching psychoanalysis in the universities. You have come to search and seek somebody who is absolutely untouched by the West. And there is a man.”
And there was a man - Shri Raman Maharshi. Wherever Jung went - and he was there for three months - everywhere the same name was given to him. “Go to Arunachal in South India and meet this man who is uneducated, who knows nothing of psychoanalysis; he is the man the East has been able to produce. Just go and sit with him and talk with him and listen to him. If you have some questions, ask him.” But you will be surprised: Jung never went there.
And later on, feeling that he will be criticized, Jung wrote, “I consideredly did not go to Raman Maharshi because the East has its own way, the West has its own way, and they should not be mixed” - just to protect himself from criticism. Then why did he go to India at all? He was told again and again to go to a man who was available, which is rare, and he did not go there, although he went up to Madras, from where it was only a two hour journey to Arunachal!
Jung did not go to the man, whom just by meeting he would have seen how a clear man is, how a man is who has cleaned his mind completely - his eyes, his gestures, his words, his authority. He does not quote scriptures, he knows himself.
Jung did not go there, and he himself felt guilty. To defend himself he started writing that the East and the West have different ways. This is nonsense, because man - whether in the East or in the West - is the same. And it is strange that he was teaching Eastern students Western psychology. He should have refused because this is mixing East and West. If he was really honest then he should have said, “You go back to the East.”
He was teaching Eastern students Western psychology, but he was not ready to go to an Eastern meditator, just to meet him. What is the fear? The fear is that Jung is as normal a person as you are - just knowledgeable. He has gathered from books, but he has no authentic experience of his own.
Western psychoanalysis is just a business. It is cheating people. It is simply exploiting people without any help, and because there is no other alternative people have to go to it. The psychoanalysts themselves go to other psychoanalysts. And psychoanalysts go mad more than any other profession! They commit suicide more than any other profession; they are more perverted in every way than any other profession.
It is a very strange phenomenon. It is not a science at all, it is just a fiction. But it has become a big profession."
Was at a store selling cigars, and the tag line for one of the brands was "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar--this isn't." My guys, did you really not have a single person in the marketing department who knew that y'all are suggesting your cigars are a phallus?
Very well explained.
Thank you.
Best science communicator in any fields, love you dave!
Sigmund Freud was a nutty coke head. His drug habits were pretty amazing, and he wrote a lot about his medicinal use of cocaine and many of the other substances available in pharmacies in the 19th Century. It's absolutely fascinating reading. Not sure how it is in the States, but clinical psychologists in Australia are dangerously under qualified (as well as dangerously inaccessible). Many have an overtly prescriptive style of "therapy" that work for some, but sets most up for failure. Medical psychotherapy - so, an actual doctor - is a FAR more constructive approach. Divorcing mind and body is a BIG mistake, and clinical psychologists' ignorance of physiology makes them further inefficacious. But the big issue is access; the public healthcare system won't provide any more than ten sessions with a clinical psychologist and NONE with a psychiatrist or psychotherapist (though, they are subsidised), thus leaving assessment and prescribing in the hands of general practitioners, who obviously don't have any specialised training in psychiatry. It's pathetic. How does someone in the States access free mental health ca- ... whoops, ah, never mind.
Where did you hang the graphene gift from James Tour?
Sounds like his partiality towards stimulants is similar to academics today with caffeine. I'm sure if coke was readily available and not stigmatized similar to Freud's time, it would be just as popular so cant really hold that against him. The problem with the medical approach to treating psychological conditions is it relies too much on medicine as a remedy, which we are learning more and more can be detrimental to one's overall health in the long term. Its useful for treating symptoms, just like painkillers are useful for alleviating inflammation for example, but taking painkillers every day for years takes a toll on your body and inflammation can be alleviated holistically which is much better for the long term. The same goes for the majority of psychological conditions.
Professor Dave, I came in this comment section to address you about the transgender issue with Mr. Matt Walsh. I would like to say that video was very elucidating to me, as I really wanted to hear someone like you talk about, specifically, the majority of talking points in that video. That also made me realize how important is to create and engage in debate (with science) with the group which dominates mass media and, therefore, the government. I am really thankful for your videos, as I am an older follower but have recently been targeted with your videos. And I am really enjoying them. Cheers from Brazil!
Professor, if you read this, as a fellow teacher please don’t stop with 120 year old psychiatry. To start with Psychology as opposed to with the ideas of a medical physician, start with William James. Yes, all should know a bit of Freud since his terminology is used to this day. However, today’s psychology (not psychiatry) in the form of cognitive behavioral psychology and emotional intelligence is as far away from Freud as Galileo is from Ptolemy. You teach facts. If you mean to teach Psychology, please differentiate between the field as it is in the 21st century and the history of psychological ideas-for which we can go back to the Greeks. Summarizing CBT and explaining EI would be of enormous, immediate, pragmatic benefit to your viewers.
Why do we use a science based method, wich requires group study’s and research based approached, for assessing specific individuals who may not have specific symptoms.
My professor hasn’t gotten to me.
No matter how much i study about Freud...my face always looks like im seeing someone shit😭😭😭LIKE BROS BRAIN HAD TO BE STUDIED
ive already taken my AP Psych exam, but im sure this will be useful for people who take it next year :)
The Psychosexual part did seem rather weird...
Even from today's standards its weird.. imagine what people thought over 100 years ago when he first proposed these things
@@RichardKoenigsberg People are animals and animals have those instincts so of course its gonna exist, its what keeps our species alive. But Freud's theory of psychosexual development is patently absurd even psychologists don't take it seriously
do carl jung
I know this is off topic but I am curious, what did you do with the gift by James Tour from the debate?
Freud was certifiable.
I love this series and hope you keep educating us. Go! Go! Go! Go!
Can we get a psychoanalysis of Tour? 😆
In the best interest of the channel, may I recommend you move this good comment to the correct video so it keeps this one on the subject of Siggy Fraud?
Thanks for your interest and contribution.
I’ m A-FREUD this video is spot-on!! 😅
One of the founding fathers of the field of psychology. A great mind and gift to humanity!!
And a pedophiel
Bro
This video went roller coaster in the second half
Thanks for this. So helpful!
But truth is all about perspective 😂❤
Guesss what?
I found goldmine
Thanks bro keep posting ❤❤
This video on Sigmund Freud and psychoanalysis is fantastic! 🎥 The deep dive into Freud’s theories and the foundational concepts of clinical psychology is incredibly insightful. If you’re interested in exploring the depths of the human mind and understanding the roots of psychoanalytic theory, this is a must-watch!
If you enjoyed this video, make sure to check out my channel, Mindful Horizons, where I dive into similar topics in psychology and consciousness. Your support helps me create more engaging audio and video content! 🌟 #ClinicalPsychology #SigmundFreud #Psychoanalysis #MindfulHorizons
so if I'm understanding this correctly, Freud believed that girls desired their fathers, but realized they could never have them because they didn't have a penis, and then blamed their mother because they don't have a penis.
what the hell was this dude on?
cocaine
do the fathers in this world only like people with penises?
Sent message.
I love your lessons Dave, you are one of the best Science and Education channels online!
My study background is a bachelor's in Computer science and now I am studying a master's in cognitive science with a specialization in cognitive psychology and neuroscience. I took some technical classes too but I enjoyed these two majors so much and in the future, I want to work as a clinical psychologist. My next plan is to do PhD as well from any German university. But every time I discuss this with any senior I get the same reply that I cannot be a clinical psychologist. Would you guide me on what should i do or any other field I should search about if I can't be a clinical psychologist.?I just want a bright future i struggled a lot in finding my interest. And now I need help from seniors.
Before I began my psychology degree, I read extensively about Freud’s theories. Alas, Freud wasn’t even mentioned. Behaviourism was said to be the essence of psychology. Of minor interest only.
Is castration anxiety scientific in psychology has an iota of truth? Say yes or no
Yes
ChatGPT ♥️
sigmond freud is the lawyer in OMG movie who is Kiran yadav den
ngl, the quantity of wierd ideas about children and all of that sexual (penis and penis envy in particular) stuff is rather concerning
Freud was a genius. Saying his theories are nonsense is simply denying the unconscious.
ur recent debate analysis when?
He did one on Bridge the Divide's channel a few days ago.
th-cam.com/users/live8PhIoPS6X44?feature=share here it is
Freud said that "The Irish Race was impervious to psychoanalysis." So I guess I am safe. Lol
*writes 'clueless' on chalkboard*
Looks like I win this one, Dave.
Seriously enjoyable video - the range of in-depth information available on this channel is astounding! Fun information everywhere 👍
@Professor Dave Explains Can you do a video of learning Japanese?
but didnt Freuds grandson abuse a bunch of children?
Hi... good!.. keep posting.... thanks.
Wow everything after 7:08 was just utterly ridiculous
To be honest, I really don’t think the cognitive theories have superseded Freudian and Jungian ideas.
Much of Freud is obsolete. Nobody subscribes to psychosexual stages.
In 1960 the did prove the super Ed go development of women. Most all psychoanalysisst agree with Freud. Freud never accepted the "Electra" complex theory. Thats from Jung.
Sometimes a banana is just a banana Anna ...
So far I still can't stand about "psychosexual development"
This is splendid presentation. The denial of psychosexual development is more based on barriers of some groups. The reason is however at the individual level: we cannot see or we dont want to see our backgrounds.
It is important theory and obvious to everyone, who can follow children.
thanks for this lesson, Professor Dave.
Thanks!
Another important and underexplained bit of Freudian history is his original "Seduction Hypothesis", which is basically the concept that all mental illness is because of repressed memories of CSA, prior to his development of the Psychosexual stages. Basically, he swung from believing everyone had been abused as children and were unaware of it, to a theory that all children fantasize about sexual activities with caregivers. It's a controversial and heavily argued area, but it gives some needed context.
Carl Jung next!
I wonder what crazy things I've said in my dreaming or sleeping
thanks Dave
Just the way that licensure works in the United States, a clinical psychologist unfortunately is the last person to provide psychotherapy in most areas. Clinical psych people go through extensive psychometric training, and a lot of them do nothing but administer standardized tests.
Psychotherapy tends to be more frequently delivered by social workers and people with an MS or MA in psychology, rather than by a clinical psychologist per se. A person cannot practice as a psychologist in the United States unless they have a doctorate.
In my little part of the world, for instance, we have dozens of psychology trained psychotherapists and several more dozen social workers who deliver psychotherapy. And we have two clinical psych people, and they do nothing but diagnose and give assessments.
In theory, clinical psychology is the discipline that examines this material, but in practice, psychotherapy actually comes from counseling departments and from social work departments. And of course medical school where psychiatrists are trained.
Assessments and diagnosis and administering standardized tests are far more lucrative than psychotherapy, too. If you do assessments for ADHD and autism, you will make three or four times as much each day as you would if you are delivering psychotherapy sessions. I think money pushes clinical psych people away from psychotherapy.
I will also note that clinical psych people occupy the lowest rung of the APA. The APA values researchers and professors and organizations, it promotes research and gives awards to researchers, and it ignores and talks down to people who actually have face to face contact with patients or clients. It has been this way in psychology for a long time. Research is high value, and clinical interactions are an afterthought in psychology.
Another way to look at this is: 95% of people in psychology are engaged in clinical work, and the message they get from the APA is that they don't matter. Clinical psych doesn't really get a lot of respect in the professional organizations. This is why counseling and social workers separated from psychology decades ago.
Erfolg trug
t Geschen
Maternal Masculinity Complex
*This is a self-published theory based on the absurd theories of Freud’s Electra Complex and Oedipus Complex.*
Boys without father figures often don't experience the Oedipus complex. Instead, they tend to look up to the strongest figure in their life, which is usually their mother. As a result, they may develop aversion towards their own masculinity and experience negative emotions influenced by their mother, especially if she holds feminist beliefs. Consequently, they strive to adopt a false sense of masculinity modeled after their mother, rather than building a solid understanding of genuine masculinity. Since there isn't a strong male figure to fear and emulate, they try to become the female figure they admire, rather than learning from and feeling jealous of a father's gender traits.
Freud was a hack and the popularity of his "theories" is really unfortunate.
🙂👍
First
bro is first
Gonzalez Dorothy Davis Richard Brown Kenneth
I had a great friend whose brother knew Freud = an internationally renowned psychoanalytic family, famous etc. At the same time [= 80's] I knew a psychiatric patient who put her baby on the living-room fire: she said Satan appeared and absolutely terrified her, but tell that to an atheist shrink and incarceration follows: hence, claiming post-natal depression, she was free to go after 6 weeks. Similarly, I was called to see an acquaintance who sat catatonic in his own excrement & whose wife explained that during an acid trip [= LSD25] Satan came thru' the wall and her husband shit himself in fear. Not long afterwards she set herself and her house on fire and perished. Having taken up Freud's poisoned chalice [= someone is required to do for the psychoses what he did for the neuroses], I suggest psychology graduates, trainee psychoanalysts etc obtain a grimoire and force a demon to appear. Alas, they might find demonry intensely active in psychotics and suffer the consequences, such as vicious hatred, palpable evil, unbelievable nastiness, serious violence etc that even £200 per hour won't compensate for. Have fun!
part 2 when?
it's out
@@ProfessorDaveExplains
Ah ok.
Will you ever make a series focusing entirely on Freud himself or entirely on psychoanalysis?
If not, are there any syllabus or documentaries that you would recommend on that subject?
Love this.Never stop this❤
I remember studying Freud back at Uni 30 years ago and how Freud's theories freaked everyone out, especially women. I still hold him in high regard, generally speaking in a round about way he was spot on. You simply cannot study psychology without studying Freud and that means a lot.
I remember hearing at a university lecture something to the effect that Freud was sometimes right for the right reasons, sometimes right for the wrong reasons and sometimes wrong for really interesting reasons.
What does this mean @attilathenun?
The lecturer was making the point that some of Freud's conclusions have been found to be on a firm foundation; others may indeed be correct but not for the reasons Freud advanced; and some are plain wrong but the reasoning which led to those wrong conclusions has been found to be interesting in itself.
Which specific conclusions fit which particular categories I can't say now. All this was a long time ago.
Don christie you see this ?
Professor Dave‼️🔥‼️🔥‼️
Great video Dave.
I cringed at the ending section of the video like where did all that come from to Froyed?
Imagination mixed w overthinking
Is Freudian theory science in psychology has an iota of truth? Say yes or no
Yes.
ChatGPT ♥️♥️
It's crazy how much of psychoanalysis and psychology in general has proven about 20 years later to be absolute nonsense. Phrenology, everything Freud did, lobotomies, somatotypes, repressed memories... the list goes on.
But I'm totally sure we've got it right this time, and our current psychological beliefs are definitely not just the ravings of a madman with an unhealthy obsession with kids.
Keep up the good work!
Freud was, arguably, the most groundbreaking leader of their particular subject of ANY field. Without him we wouldn’t be anywhere near where we are in the field of psychology and psychiatry. I can’t think of another field where one person has had as much influence as Freud did on his related fields.
Yes, probably because you aren't scientifically literate.
@@dRoy8364 You just made me laugh out loud, thanks. In the broad field of Psychology how about the impact of Carl Jung or Donald Meichenbaum? The latter is hardly known to the public, but he and those like-minded from the 1970’s onward revolutionized modern clinical psychology and from there all clinical psychotherapy. Donald didn’t talk about sex but the mind . Guess that’s why he’s little known.
You are a very good Professor and TH-camr. ❤
He's not a professor.
@@PBeringer🤓
Mental illness- you are not entirely right - psychosomatic illness is how psychoanalysis began.
This information is factual.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains No - Freud was influenced first by Charcoal - and then by Breuer, - & what was then diagnosed as hysteria. The first book - "Studies on Hysteria" 1895. Oh, so what. carry on with the series everything else is fine.
What are you unhappy with?
@@damedusa5107 Hysteria is the result of a psychological defence mechanism of conversion, - not a mental illness ( like schizophrenia or bipolar mood disorder) But, it is not a big deal ...
@@tonyburton419 me move on? You brought it up.
it's pronounced freud
I'm not sure you understand how sound works.
Is jungian theory science in psychology has an iota of truth? Say yes or no
Yes
ChatGPT ♥️🌹
Considering Jung was a follower of Freud, yes
We are apes, so I think it’s unfruitful to understand your perception as more than that of an ape.
That is a bit of an oversimplification. Psychology has advanced by a lot in recent years.
@@daved.8483 In statistically descriptive terms I completely agree, but not in terms of explanations or mechanisms of action not much.
@@daikucoffee5316 so we're excluding how big the impact that spoken language has on people..?
@@djninjitsuchannel7857 What do you mean? Linguistics exists.
@Daiku Coffee actions and behaviours are determined by a lot of factors. There are some mechanisms that resemble every living being on our planet, such as the need to reproduce.
However, to state that those needs are the main ones we should focus on when it comes to behaviour, It is still an oversimplification.
There reasons to why, to become a clinical psychologist, you will need to study a 5 years course at a university. There is much more to it, and it is so fascinating! 😉👍
Frued was such a weirdo 🤣🤣 holy shit😭
Most smart men are
Did Freud "come up" with the ideas of manifest content and latent content as hypotheses, and then investigated their existence, or did he...assume these were correct, and went on from there?
he just tried stuff and if it "worked" on some patients he assumed they were correct. He had the most random approaches, for example in a writing he just casually drops a line like: "so at this point I applied the head-pushing method, which i explained in another book, but basically im applying pressure on the patients head to trigger some response"
His ideas are derived from his early studies in biology, so they are not "made up" but rather inferred from relevant scientific literature at the time