Podcasts about for freud

Begrepet om psykiske forsvarsmekanismer stammer fra Freud, men det var hans datter, Anna Freud, som videreutviklet konseptet innenfor en retning som kalles egopsykologi. For Freud spilte forsvaret en sentral rolle ved utviklingen av symptomer. Han forstod forsvaret som ubevisste mentale mekanismer, hvis oppgave var å holde uakseptable følelser og tanker på avstand. Med andre ord var det forsvarets oppgave å passe på at våre mindre attråverdige impulser og innskytelser ikke presset seg inn i bevisstheten og skapte unødvendig mye uro. Freud påpekte at uakseptable eller forbudte impulser fremkaller signalangst (det er fare på ferde), noe som deretter aktiverer en slags avvergingsmekanisme som bestreber seg på å holde impulsene utenfor bevisstheten.Denne prosessen er komplisert, og mens hensikten er å beholde en slags sjelefred, ender det ofte opp mer en forvrengt oppfattelse av eget «selv» og verden omkring. I dagens episode skal jeg dykke ned i menneskets motstridende krefter og se på hvordan vi klarer å forholde oss til paradoksene i oss selv på en mer eller mindre sunn måte.For den psykologisk interesserteEr du mer interessert i mennesket indre liv, relasjoner og selvutvikling, håper jeg du klikker deg inn på min Patreon konto og bli supporter av SinnSyn og WebPsykologen. På den måten støtter du dette prosjektet, og som takk for støtten får du masse ekstramateriale. Du får flere eksklusive episoder av SinnSyn, mentale øvelser, videomateriell som ikke publiseres andre steder, og du kan høre meg lese og gjennomgå min første bok, Selvfølelsens Psykologi – Bedre selvfølelse ved å bruke hodet litt annerledes. Og deretter kan du fortsette på min andre bok, Jeg, meg selv og selvbildet. Dersom du ønsker å gå dypere ned i dagens tematikk, kan du sjekke ut episode #82 - Motstridende krefter i den menneskelige psyke hvor jeg reflekterer videre over de motstridende og tidvis paradoksale kreftene i menneskets sjelsliv som kjemper på grensen mellom det bevisste og det ubevisste. Ellers er målet med SinnSyns mentale helsestudio å finne øvelser hvor den psykologiske teorien kan forankres i hverdagslivet. Ved hjelp av en rekke psykologiske tradisjoner forsøker jeg å lage et slags treningsprogram hvor man gjør øvelser som styrker selvbilde, selvfølelsen og mentale muskler. Er du blant de som finner verdi her på SinnSyn, og litt over middels interessert i psykologi og filosofi, så er medlemskap i SinnSynes mentale helsestudio kanskje noe for deg. Håper å se deg som Patreon-supporter. Du finner medlemskapet på www.patreon.com/sinnsyn. Nå har jeg også et tilbud til bedrifter på dette mentale treningsstudioet. Man kan forebygge sykefravær ved å styrke den enkeltes psykiske helse. I tillegg vil en bedre psykisk helse gi seg utslag på en positiv måte i arbeidsmiljøet. Det kan øke den enkeltes energi og entusiasme og styrke relasjonene mellom de ansatte. Av den grunn tilbyr jeg nå medlemskap for bedrifter på SinnSyns mentale helsestudio. Er du leder i en organisasjon, en kommune eller en bedrift eller lignende, kan du kontakte meg på webpsykologene@gmail.com for å be om et tilbud. På WebPsykologen.no finner du også en beskrivelse tilbudet på helsestudio. Få tilgang til ALT ekstramateriale som medlem på SinnSyns Mentale Helsestudio via SinnSyn-appen her: https://www.webpsykologen.no/et-mentalt-helsestudio-i-lomma/ eller som Patreon-Medlem her: https://www.patreon.com/sinnsyn. For reklamefri pod og bonus-episoder kan du bli SinnSyn Pluss abonnent her https://plus.acast.com/s/sinnsyn. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nowadays we look around us at the well-oiled machinery of our advanced technological age and fondly muse that our society is as stable as bedrock. It is not. It is in fact a mad mishmash of individual fears, sacred cows, crazy desires - and a deep underlying sense of insecurity. The rock-solid state used to be the th century's secular TOTEM, for it was the symbolic appeasement of aporetic oedipal rage in a symbol - to Hegel as his many followers. Then radical opposition to this centrality arose through Marx, and the modern bifurcation of politics, which has been totalized in postmodernity, first arose. Why? Because religion was no longer the foundation of the state. As Freud says, we neurotics NEED a Totem, but that Totem was being politically dismantled. An Unbearable Lightness of Being was being born. The mad mishmash is our inheritance. And so we no longer have a secure substitute for our parents' love - our childhood Totem - which our inner Oedipus has cut out of our lives. So we hide the Bugaboo - that's the sum of our fears, our taboo - safely in the symbol of a Totem: our books, our TV & our Films. My own Oedipus took up his parricidal arms against the taboo when I was twenty. An overly affective type of kid, I had never really left my feathered parental nest. My inner Oedipus cut those ties, but they never stopped bleeding. Until I read Judith Viorst's Necessary Losses. The myth of uniformly happy family ties MUST die, a necessary loss. Without wings we can't fly. But back then I chose the false comfort of a Totem of icy alienation, like so many others. An invalid substitute for rage, because it too kills our SOULS. And reality gives us wings ONLY if we have a valid Totem to substitute for the Taboo of finding liberation from the myth of the nuclear family. You see, severing himself like that is Oedipus' undoing. As with the alienated. But it doesn't have to be like that. Isaiah's suffering Servant was someone I could identify with - and He is THE traditionally valid Totem. The Totem Freud couldn't accept. When we hate, we are killing Him. And so eventually, it is OURSELVES we are killing with our primitive rage. That happened to me, eventually, believe it or not! You see, I have managed to kill my own high opinion of myself with that same rage, and recover my inner humanity. As in the great new book Love and Rage, I had to USE my anger as a means toward the end of attaining tranquility. So I did. At the end of my road my heart is clear of spiderwebs - and happy. The thunderheads of my rage are dissipating in a new sunrise. For Freud was wrong. A true Totem is STILL viable, because it brings peace. And God is the Totem that leads us Home to Ourselves - WITHOUT illusions. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/you-betterknow4/message

Nowadays we look around us at the well-oiled machinery of our advanced technological age and fondly muse that our society is as stable as bedrock. It is not. It is in fact a mad mishmash of individual fears, sacred cows, crazy desires - and a deep underlying sense of insecurity. The rock-solid state used to be the th century's secular TOTEM, for it was the symbolic appeasement of aporetic oedipal rage in a symbol - to Hegel as his many followers. Then radical opposition to this centrality arose through Marx, and the modern bifurcation of politics, which has been totalized in postmodernity, first arose. Why? Because religion was no longer the foundation of the state. As Freud says, we neurotics NEED a Totem, but that Totem was being politically dismantled. An Unbearable Lightness of Being was being born. The mad mishmash is our inheritance. And so we no longer have a secure substitute for our parents' love - our childhood Totem - which our inner Oedipus has cut out of our lives. So we hide the Bugaboo - that's the sum of our fears, our taboo - safely in the symbol of a Totem: our books, our TV & our Films. My own Oedipus took up his parricidal arms against the taboo when I was twenty. An overly affective type of kid, I had never really left my feathered parental nest. My inner Oedipus cut those ties, but they never stopped bleeding. Until I read Judith Viorst's Necessary Losses. The myth of uniformly happy family ties MUST die, a necessary loss. Without wings we can't fly. But back then I chose the false comfort of a Totem of icy alienation, like so many others. An invalid substitute for rage, because it too kills our SOULS. And reality gives us wings ONLY if we have a valid Totem to substitute for the Taboo of finding liberation from the myth of the nuclear family. You see, severing himself like that is Oedipus' undoing. As with the alienated. But it doesn't have to be like that. Isaiah's suffering Servant was someone I could identify with - and He is THE traditionally valid Totem. The Totem Freud couldn't accept. When we hate, we are killing Him. And so eventually, it is OURSELVES we are killing with our primitive rage. That happened to me, eventually, believe it or not! You see, I have managed to kill my own high opinion of myself with that same rage, and recover my inner humanity. As in the great new book Love and Rage, I had to USE my anger as a means toward the end of attaining tranquility. So I did. At the end of my road my heart is clear of spiderwebs - and happy. The thunderheads of my rage are dissipating in a new sunrise. For Freud was wrong. A true Totem is STILL viable, because it brings peace. And God is the Totem that leads us Home to Ourselves - WITHOUT illusions. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/you-betterknow4/message

In this episode we explore "The Uncanny," specifically as it relates to A.I. and Robotics. The Uncanny Valley is the chasm which we approach and enter into as robots become increasingly reminiscent of human beings in their likeness.  We start off by exploring the background of the uncanny as it relates it its pioneers. Pop culture references such as The Twilight Zone and Black Mirror were explored in this podcast as well. “What is the uncanny? For Freud, the uncanny locates the strangeness in the ordinary and can also be repressed material from childhood. The uncanny, as psychoanalytic theorist Jacques Lacan states is "in the field where we do not know how to distinguish bad and good, pleasure from displeasure", resulting in an irreducible anxiety that gestures to the Real.” The uncanny is that part of us that sees something that triggers the repressed material from our subconscious causing it to jump to the surface at a moments notice. The Uncanny is a strange place. It presents itself to us in many different contexts. But contrary to what many believe about the uncanny, we don't have to fear it. The uncanny can be used to stimulate many of our creative pursuits. Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley Music: Ryan Little - dahlia.(Free Download Link: https://hypeddit.com/track/evmggm) --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/anthonyboyd/message

We hear a lot about ego today. Whether it's in association with Presidents or Chief Execs, in relation to social media or celebrity, ego appears to be everywhere. But is it a problem? Ego is Latin for “I” so clearly we can’t escape it. For Freud the Ego plays a moderating role. Yet today we refer to the Ego in a negative sense. “That’s your Ego talking" or “the Ego has landed.” So what is the Ego and can religion help us to understand our relationship to it? In the final episode of this series of Beyond Belief, Ernie Rea is joined by Ajmal Masroor, a Bangladeshi born British Imam, the Reverend Lucy Winkett, Rector of St James’ Church Piccadilly and Dav Panesar, a Sikh who has carried out pioneering work on mindfulness and contemplative based health interventions in the UK. Producer: Catherine Earlam Series Producer: Amanda Hancox

We hear a lot about ego today. Whether it's in association with Presidents or Chief Execs, in relation to social media or celebrity, ego appears to be everywhere. But is it a problem? Ego is Latin for “I” so clearly we can’t escape it. For Freud the Ego plays a moderating role. Yet today we refer to the Ego in a negative sense. “That’s your Ego talking" or “the Ego has landed.” So what is the Ego and can religion help us to understand our relationship to it? In the final episode of this series of Beyond Belief, Ernie Rea is joined by Ajmal Masroor, a Bangladeshi born British Imam, the Reverend Lucy Winkett, Rector of St James’ Church Piccadilly and Dav Panesar, a Sikh who has carried out pioneering work on mindfulness and contemplative based health interventions in the UK. Producer: Catherine Earlam Series Producer: Amanda Hancox

In April 1923 Sigmund Freud detected a lesion in his mouth that turned out to be cancerous. From diagnosis to his death, he endured 33 surgeries and 10 prostheses. In 1932 alone, Freud consulted with his surgeon Hans Pichler 92 times. Freud’s smoking motivated much of the fussiness with his prosthetic jaw: it had to be right at the palate edge, with optimal occlusion so as to get the most out of his cigars. For Freud, smoking facilitated writing and intellectual creativity; it provided exquisite enjoyment. An inanimate object thus served as a conduit of both vitality and grave illness—a testament to the entanglement, indeed, the indistinguishability of the life and death drives. In 1977, after a biopsy of a tumor in her right breast, Audre Lorde fantasized about lopping off the agent of her destruction like “a she-wolf chewing off a paw caught in a trap.” (56) In the manner of a Kleinian infant, she directed her rage at the persecutory breast that betrayed her (once again) and ceased being her own. Lorde turned her poetry and personal survival into political acts of reparation, linking the ravages of cancer to racial and sexual injury and offering herself to queer communities of color as an object of introjection and identification. In 1992, on the anniversary of her breast cancer diagnosis, queer theorist Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick was en route to yet another academic lecture. She sat in a plane on a runway in frigid Toronto watching Pepto-Bismol-pink anti-icing fluid run down the window beside her. Seized by nauseating horror, she recalled the bloody lymphatic discharge draining from her body in the weeks following her mastectomy. In 1996, after imaging revealed a spinal metastasis that would ultimately kill her, Sedgwick emerged as a patient-teacher in her polyphonic A Dialogue on Love (1999), an account of a psychodynamic treatment intermixed with her poetry and her therapist’s notes. Through autobiographically inflected theoretical writings and the advice column, “Off My Chest,” Sedgwick engaged in what she called good pedagogy, instructing readers about love and mourning in the “prognosis time” of incremental bodily loss. Lana Lin brings together the stories of Freud, Lorde, and Sedgwick, as well as insights from her own struggle with breast cancer in the tour de force, Freud’s Jaw and Other Lost Objects: Fractured Subjectivity in the Face of Cancer (Fordham University Press, 2017). With her three transferential figures, Lin explores what it means to loosen one’s grip on objects, to live with self-estrangement and threats to bodily integrity, and to understand loss as the maintenance of relationality. As cancer fragments and changes one’s relationship to time, it becomes a catalyst for reparation, invention, and love. Anna Fishzon, PhD, is Senior Research Associate at the University of Bristol, UK. She is a candidate at the Institute for Psychoanalytic Training and Research (IPTAR) and author of Fandom, Authenticity, and Opera: Mad Acts and Letter Scenes in Fin-de-siecle Russia (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013). She can be reached at afishzon@gmail.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In April 1923 Sigmund Freud detected a lesion in his mouth that turned out to be cancerous. From diagnosis to his death, he endured 33 surgeries and 10 prostheses. In 1932 alone, Freud consulted with his surgeon Hans Pichler 92 times. Freud’s smoking motivated much of the fussiness with his prosthetic jaw: it had to be right at the palate edge, with optimal occlusion so as to get the most out of his cigars. For Freud, smoking facilitated writing and intellectual creativity; it provided exquisite enjoyment. An inanimate object thus served as a conduit of both vitality and grave illness—a testament to the entanglement, indeed, the indistinguishability of the life and death drives. In 1977, after a biopsy of a tumor in her right breast, Audre Lorde fantasized about lopping off the agent of her destruction like “a she-wolf chewing off a paw caught in a trap.” (56) In the manner of a Kleinian infant, she directed her rage at the persecutory breast that betrayed her (once again) and ceased being her own. Lorde turned her poetry and personal survival into political acts of reparation, linking the ravages of cancer to racial and sexual injury and offering herself to queer communities of color as an object of introjection and identification. In 1992, on the anniversary of her breast cancer diagnosis, queer theorist Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick was en route to yet another academic lecture. She sat in a plane on a runway in frigid Toronto watching Pepto-Bismol-pink anti-icing fluid run down the window beside her. Seized by nauseating horror, she recalled the bloody lymphatic discharge draining from her body in the weeks following her mastectomy. In 1996, after imaging revealed a spinal metastasis that would ultimately kill her, Sedgwick emerged as a patient-teacher in her polyphonic A Dialogue on Love (1999), an account of a psychodynamic treatment intermixed with her poetry and her therapist’s notes. Through autobiographically inflected theoretical writings and the advice column, “Off My Chest,” Sedgwick engaged in what she called good pedagogy, instructing readers about love and mourning in the “prognosis time” of incremental bodily loss. Lana Lin brings together the stories of Freud, Lorde, and Sedgwick, as well as insights from her own struggle with breast cancer in the tour de force, Freud’s Jaw and Other Lost Objects: Fractured Subjectivity in the Face of Cancer (Fordham University Press, 2017). With her three transferential figures, Lin explores what it means to loosen one’s grip on objects, to live with self-estrangement and threats to bodily integrity, and to understand loss as the maintenance of relationality. As cancer fragments and changes one’s relationship to time, it becomes a catalyst for reparation, invention, and love. Anna Fishzon, PhD, is Senior Research Associate at the University of Bristol, UK. She is a candidate at the Institute for Psychoanalytic Training and Research (IPTAR) and author of Fandom, Authenticity, and Opera: Mad Acts and Letter Scenes in Fin-de-siecle Russia (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013). She can be reached at afishzon@gmail.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In April 1923 Sigmund Freud detected a lesion in his mouth that turned out to be cancerous. From diagnosis to his death, he endured 33 surgeries and 10 prostheses. In 1932 alone, Freud consulted with his surgeon Hans Pichler 92 times. Freud’s smoking motivated much of the fussiness with his prosthetic jaw: it had to be right at the palate edge, with optimal occlusion so as to get the most out of his cigars. For Freud, smoking facilitated writing and intellectual creativity; it provided exquisite enjoyment. An inanimate object thus served as a conduit of both vitality and grave illness—a testament to the entanglement, indeed, the indistinguishability of the life and death drives. In 1977, after a biopsy of a tumor in her right breast, Audre Lorde fantasized about lopping off the agent of her destruction like “a she-wolf chewing off a paw caught in a trap.” (56) In the manner of a Kleinian infant, she directed her rage at the persecutory breast that betrayed her (once again) and ceased being her own. Lorde turned her poetry and personal survival into political acts of reparation, linking the ravages of cancer to racial and sexual injury and offering herself to queer communities of color as an object of introjection and identification. In 1992, on the anniversary of her breast cancer diagnosis, queer theorist Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick was en route to yet another academic lecture. She sat in a plane on a runway in frigid Toronto watching Pepto-Bismol-pink anti-icing fluid run down the window beside her. Seized by nauseating horror, she recalled the bloody lymphatic discharge draining from her body in the weeks following her mastectomy. In 1996, after imaging revealed a spinal metastasis that would ultimately kill her, Sedgwick emerged as a patient-teacher in her polyphonic A Dialogue on Love (1999), an account of a psychodynamic treatment intermixed with her poetry and her therapist’s notes. Through autobiographically inflected theoretical writings and the advice column, “Off My Chest,” Sedgwick engaged in what she called good pedagogy, instructing readers about love and mourning in the “prognosis time” of incremental bodily loss. Lana Lin brings together the stories of Freud, Lorde, and Sedgwick, as well as insights from her own struggle with breast cancer in the tour de force, Freud’s Jaw and Other Lost Objects: Fractured Subjectivity in the Face of Cancer (Fordham University Press, 2017). With her three transferential figures, Lin explores what it means to loosen one’s grip on objects, to live with self-estrangement and threats to bodily integrity, and to understand loss as the maintenance of relationality. As cancer fragments and changes one’s relationship to time, it becomes a catalyst for reparation, invention, and love. Anna Fishzon, PhD, is Senior Research Associate at the University of Bristol, UK. She is a candidate at the Institute for Psychoanalytic Training and Research (IPTAR) and author of Fandom, Authenticity, and Opera: Mad Acts and Letter Scenes in Fin-de-siecle Russia (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013). She can be reached at afishzon@gmail.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In April 1923 Sigmund Freud detected a lesion in his mouth that turned out to be cancerous. From diagnosis to his death, he endured 33 surgeries and 10 prostheses. In 1932 alone, Freud consulted with his surgeon Hans Pichler 92 times. Freud's smoking motivated much of the fussiness with his prosthetic jaw: it had to be right at the palate edge, with optimal occlusion so as to get the most out of his cigars. For Freud, smoking facilitated writing and intellectual creativity; it provided exquisite enjoyment. An inanimate object thus served as a conduit of both vitality and grave illness—a testament to the entanglement, indeed, the indistinguishability of the life and death drives. In 1977, after a biopsy of a tumor in her right breast, Audre Lorde fantasized about lopping off the agent of her destruction like “a she-wolf chewing off a paw caught in a trap.” (56) In the manner of a Kleinian infant, she directed her rage at the persecutory breast that betrayed her (once again) and ceased being her own. Lorde turned her poetry and personal survival into political acts of reparation, linking the ravages of cancer to racial and sexual injury and offering herself to queer communities of color as an object of introjection and identification. In 1992, on the anniversary of her breast cancer diagnosis, queer theorist Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick was en route to yet another academic lecture. She sat in a plane on a runway in frigid Toronto watching Pepto-Bismol-pink anti-icing fluid run down the window beside her. Seized by nauseating horror, she recalled the bloody lymphatic discharge draining from her body in the weeks following her mastectomy. In 1996, after imaging revealed a spinal metastasis that would ultimately kill her, Sedgwick emerged as a patient-teacher in her polyphonic A Dialogue on Love (1999), an account of a psychodynamic treatment intermixed with her poetry and her therapist's notes. Through autobiographically inflected theoretical writings and the advice column, “Off My Chest,” Sedgwick engaged in what she called good pedagogy, instructing readers about love and mourning in the “prognosis time” of incremental bodily loss. Lana Lin brings together the stories of Freud, Lorde, and Sedgwick, as well as insights from her own struggle with breast cancer in the tour de force, Freud's Jaw and Other Lost Objects: Fractured Subjectivity in the Face of Cancer (Fordham University Press, 2017). With her three transferential figures, Lin explores what it means to loosen one's grip on objects, to live with self-estrangement and threats to bodily integrity, and to understand loss as the maintenance of relationality. As cancer fragments and changes one's relationship to time, it becomes a catalyst for reparation, invention, and love. Anna Fishzon, PhD, is Senior Research Associate at the University of Bristol, UK. She is a candidate at the Institute for Psychoanalytic Training and Research (IPTAR) and author of Fandom, Authenticity, and Opera: Mad Acts and Letter Scenes in Fin-de-siecle Russia (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013). She can be reached at afishzon@gmail.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychoanalysis

Renewing and traversing the never-ending debate as to whether psychoanalysis is a science, R. D. Hinshelwood, British and on the Kleinian side of life, prompts listeners to consider how we might produce and buttress our knowledge base via implementing scientific methods. By discussing research as an offensive tactic, as opposed to a defensive one, in a world where psychoanalysis finds itself derided as lacking “evidence,” Hinshelwood’s Research on the Couch: Single-Case Studies, Subjectivity and Psychoanalytic Knowledge (Routledge, 2013) teaches us about the single case study and its usefulness for inquiring into the value (or lack) of particular metapsychologies and clinical theories. Questions emerge: Will research on psychoanalysis, proving its usefulness, catch the attention of insurance companies and governmental policy makers, opening currently shut doors? Will affiliating ourselves with science strengthen us? In what ways might research be helpful? Hinshelwood takes us on a tour as he responds to these and other questions in the interview and in the book. In the end we are left with an awareness that research borne of the clinical encounter can yield powerful data. For Freud the consulting room was also a laboratory, and the psychoanalytic method itself a form of research in and of itself. Yet, when it comes to research in the field, we seem to be up against something that at times feels tinged with the impossible. As Hinshelwood writes, “it appears that an extreme standard of mental health is often expected of psychoanalysts, and a suspicion is visited upon us if we are just ordinary.” The implications of this statement for the nature of our researches is plain to see. However, by placing psychoanalytic research adjacent to research in the natural sciences yet apart from research in psychology and medicine, Hinshelwood protects the uniqueness of the method we call the talking cure. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Renewing and traversing the never-ending debate as to whether psychoanalysis is a science, R. D. Hinshelwood, British and on the Kleinian side of life, prompts listeners to consider how we might produce and buttress our knowledge base via implementing scientific methods. By discussing research as an offensive tactic, as opposed to a defensive one, in a world where psychoanalysis finds itself derided as lacking “evidence,” Hinshelwood's Research on the Couch: Single-Case Studies, Subjectivity and Psychoanalytic Knowledge (Routledge, 2013) teaches us about the single case study and its usefulness for inquiring into the value (or lack) of particular metapsychologies and clinical theories. Questions emerge: Will research on psychoanalysis, proving its usefulness, catch the attention of insurance companies and governmental policy makers, opening currently shut doors? Will affiliating ourselves with science strengthen us? In what ways might research be helpful? Hinshelwood takes us on a tour as he responds to these and other questions in the interview and in the book. In the end we are left with an awareness that research borne of the clinical encounter can yield powerful data. For Freud the consulting room was also a laboratory, and the psychoanalytic method itself a form of research in and of itself. Yet, when it comes to research in the field, we seem to be up against something that at times feels tinged with the impossible. As Hinshelwood writes, “it appears that an extreme standard of mental health is often expected of psychoanalysts, and a suspicion is visited upon us if we are just ordinary.” The implications of this statement for the nature of our researches is plain to see. However, by placing psychoanalytic research adjacent to research in the natural sciences yet apart from research in psychology and medicine, Hinshelwood protects the uniqueness of the method we call the talking cure. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychoanalysis

--{ For Freud, Bernays, Skinner, Kinsey et al.: Evil Creatures of the Most Heinous Kind, Raping, Reshaping the Human Mind: "Many Fronts has This Long War of Terror, Implemented Top-Down, Covering Each Sector Of Society, Creating Mindsets of Humankind, Plundering and Altering the Human Mind, Standardizing for the Collective, Quality Control, Complete in Victory, Except for the Soul Which by Poverty and Fear They Hope to Destroy, The Physical -- Emasculated Man and Girl is Boy, Masters of Behaviour Scoffed with Assurity, Demanding Access to Young Before Maturity, Culture Creators on Board with Brother Press, Plus Academia, They're All Conscienceless, Pity the Knowing Few Who are Self-Led, Who Walk as Strangers in Lands of the Dead" © Alan Watt }-- Everyone Born into a Time and a Pre-existing System - "Oh Canada" video, Fraud of Debt, Central Banking System and Politicians - Setting up of a Confederation of the World - Generation of Cannon Fodder - Century of Change, Age of World Managers. Public Never Told the Truth by Media - Planned Economic Crash - Cost of War on (of) Terror / Wars / Military Operations. Threat of "Acid Rain" and "Hole in the Ozone Layer" - NASA to the Rescue - "Collapse" of the Thermosphere. Childless Couples to Become the Norm - Motorway Shut off to "Cut Carbon Emissions" - Emasculation of Males - Acclaim for Joining Military, Authorized Warriors - Domestic Army of Police Forces - Another Tazered to Death - War on Society and Culture. Institute for the Future, Behaviour Manipulation Techniques. Tony Blair and Family's Paganism. (See http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com for article links.) *Title/Poem and Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - July 21, 2010 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)