1
/
of
1
OGB
FREUD AND HIS SCHOOL: New Paths Of Psychology
FREUD AND HIS SCHOOL: New Paths Of Psychology
Regular price
$0.99 USD
Regular price
Sale price
$0.99 USD
Shipping calculated at checkout.
Quantity
Couldn't load pickup availability
An excerpt from the beginning of:
PART I.
THERE is no need to explain that in the discussion I of so young a subject as psychoanalysis, words which are easily misunderstood are necessarily used.
Indeed, the same word frequently serves as the symbol for very diverse ideas. I need merely to point to the word “suggestion,” and to recall the conflict over the meaning of that word in learned bodies such as the “Société de Neurologie de Paris” and the “Société Beige de Neurologie” in their meetings held in 1908 and 1909.
A misunderstanding of this sort is expressed in the squib: “What is Freud after with his analysis? Let me see! Don’t we all analyze our patients?” which I heard last year from the mouth of no less a person than Bernheim, when we met at Munich at a meeting of the “International Gesellschaft für Medizinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie.”
Most certainly we doctors analyze our patients. No examination is conceivable without analysis. No analysis of a sick person is complete without gauging his psyche. And where knowledge of the mental and spiritual life is especially needed, the physical methods are of less use than the psychical methods.
By gaining the patient’s confidence, by examining the sick person, by hearing his confession, by studying his environment, we arrive much further toward an understanding of his condition and not infrequently we can construct an appropriate therapy merely upon the foundation of the data thus obtained.
Here, direct and indirect suggestion, explanation, persuasion, stimulation, calming, encouragement, correction, distraction, regulation of work, dietetics, etc., are always shown to be positively of pronounced palliative use, and in many cases they effect cures.
But frequently one must dig deeper to penetrate to the root of the patient’s suffering, and with the above-mentioned methods we do not reach down far enough. Only that of which the patient is conscious can he communicate to us. Here we need to find the path to the deeper strata of the psyche and to learn what stays hidden there.
All irritations which affect the person from his earliest youth up leave behind them in his brain an impression, and are retained. These impressions are more or less susceptible of being brought into the memory, into the consciousness. The impressions and complexes of ideas, which cannot be brought into consciousness by spontaneous recollection or by ordinary or emphatic examination, must be. considered as belonging to the darkest domain of the subconscious.
Under the threshold of the consciousness, the germs of the nervous sick-processes, the neuroses and psychoses have their dwelling place. To trace these, to bring them to light, that is, into the consciousness, is the further task of the physician. Thus diseased-states are cured, hallucinations give way to normality. This treatment and the technic necessary for it is what we owe to the Viennese professor, Dr. Sigmund Freud, the gifted investigator into the territory of the pathogenesis of the functional nerve sicknesses. He gave the name Psychoanalysis to this investigation.
Nevertheless, to Dr. Joseph Breuer, an old Viennese physician, honor is due for having given the first impetus toward the formation of a new theory of the nature of hysteria and also of a theory of a rational treatment of this disease which until then had had a bad name. This disease was consequently most inadequately treated by the physician and even frequently ignored. But after Breuer had pointed out the way to the new path, wherein psychology stood waiting to be led, he let the thing drop. Freud, with youthful fervor and without troubling over the entire lack of sympathy of the medical world toward his efforts and results, took upon himself the guidance of the theory.
In 1895, with the publications of Freud’s first work, “Studien über Hysteria,” in collaboration with Breuer, Freud met the same fate as did Liébeault in 1866. At first he found no public. Little or no notice was taken of his revolutionary ideas about hysteria. The old order of things calmly went on. His following publication, “Sammlung kleiner Geschrifte zur Neurosenlehre” (1893-1906), wherein observations are made, of the greatest importance in psychiatry, was met by a dead silence. The author was ridiculed for his “Die Traumdeutung” (1900—1909—1912), which furnishes us with the first actual psychology of the dream. But when his “Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexual Theorie” sought to bring light into the psychology of the sex life, a storm of abuse burst forth upon the innovator. The indignation took the form of taunts and raillery, certainly a very unscientific method of controversy,...
PART I.
THERE is no need to explain that in the discussion I of so young a subject as psychoanalysis, words which are easily misunderstood are necessarily used.
Indeed, the same word frequently serves as the symbol for very diverse ideas. I need merely to point to the word “suggestion,” and to recall the conflict over the meaning of that word in learned bodies such as the “Société de Neurologie de Paris” and the “Société Beige de Neurologie” in their meetings held in 1908 and 1909.
A misunderstanding of this sort is expressed in the squib: “What is Freud after with his analysis? Let me see! Don’t we all analyze our patients?” which I heard last year from the mouth of no less a person than Bernheim, when we met at Munich at a meeting of the “International Gesellschaft für Medizinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie.”
Most certainly we doctors analyze our patients. No examination is conceivable without analysis. No analysis of a sick person is complete without gauging his psyche. And where knowledge of the mental and spiritual life is especially needed, the physical methods are of less use than the psychical methods.
By gaining the patient’s confidence, by examining the sick person, by hearing his confession, by studying his environment, we arrive much further toward an understanding of his condition and not infrequently we can construct an appropriate therapy merely upon the foundation of the data thus obtained.
Here, direct and indirect suggestion, explanation, persuasion, stimulation, calming, encouragement, correction, distraction, regulation of work, dietetics, etc., are always shown to be positively of pronounced palliative use, and in many cases they effect cures.
But frequently one must dig deeper to penetrate to the root of the patient’s suffering, and with the above-mentioned methods we do not reach down far enough. Only that of which the patient is conscious can he communicate to us. Here we need to find the path to the deeper strata of the psyche and to learn what stays hidden there.
All irritations which affect the person from his earliest youth up leave behind them in his brain an impression, and are retained. These impressions are more or less susceptible of being brought into the memory, into the consciousness. The impressions and complexes of ideas, which cannot be brought into consciousness by spontaneous recollection or by ordinary or emphatic examination, must be. considered as belonging to the darkest domain of the subconscious.
Under the threshold of the consciousness, the germs of the nervous sick-processes, the neuroses and psychoses have their dwelling place. To trace these, to bring them to light, that is, into the consciousness, is the further task of the physician. Thus diseased-states are cured, hallucinations give way to normality. This treatment and the technic necessary for it is what we owe to the Viennese professor, Dr. Sigmund Freud, the gifted investigator into the territory of the pathogenesis of the functional nerve sicknesses. He gave the name Psychoanalysis to this investigation.
Nevertheless, to Dr. Joseph Breuer, an old Viennese physician, honor is due for having given the first impetus toward the formation of a new theory of the nature of hysteria and also of a theory of a rational treatment of this disease which until then had had a bad name. This disease was consequently most inadequately treated by the physician and even frequently ignored. But after Breuer had pointed out the way to the new path, wherein psychology stood waiting to be led, he let the thing drop. Freud, with youthful fervor and without troubling over the entire lack of sympathy of the medical world toward his efforts and results, took upon himself the guidance of the theory.
In 1895, with the publications of Freud’s first work, “Studien über Hysteria,” in collaboration with Breuer, Freud met the same fate as did Liébeault in 1866. At first he found no public. Little or no notice was taken of his revolutionary ideas about hysteria. The old order of things calmly went on. His following publication, “Sammlung kleiner Geschrifte zur Neurosenlehre” (1893-1906), wherein observations are made, of the greatest importance in psychiatry, was met by a dead silence. The author was ridiculed for his “Die Traumdeutung” (1900—1909—1912), which furnishes us with the first actual psychology of the dream. But when his “Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexual Theorie” sought to bring light into the psychology of the sex life, a storm of abuse burst forth upon the innovator. The indignation took the form of taunts and raillery, certainly a very unscientific method of controversy,...
Share
