I think Freud was influenced by Christian beliefs and the patriarchal culture in which he lived, leading to wrong conclusions. I should disclose I have bone to pick with him because of his notion of penis envy. As a female, I strongly doubt any of us woke up one morning and went into a panic attack because we don't have a visible penis. :lol: Also as a pagan, he seems to have a strange notion of our development depending on the erotic areas of our bodies, rather than a more scientific understanding of the development of our neurons and brains and personalities.

However, he was not completely wrong about everything and I think his relationship with Jung was important to both men's contributions to our thoughts on psychology.

Carl Jung and Freud
Many believe Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung defined the world of psychology. Both had differing theories, but made equal impacts on people's perception of the human mind. ... Freud acted as a mentor and father figure towards Jung, and Jung acted as an energetic new prospect to the movement towards Freud.Jun 23, 2016

Freud vs. Jung | In Your Dreams - Sites at Penn State — Peen State

Jung's ideas less offensive and are more interesting to me, and from him is Joseph Campbell who gives us an interesting notion of consciousness.

Exactly what do you think Freud had to say that is worth our consideration today?

what do you think Freud had to say that is worth our consideration today? — Athena

Freud's popularized emphasis on the subconscious arising from demonstrations of hypnosis is lastingly significant.

I think that Joseph Campbell is a long lost prophet but possibly too obscure for many on this site to understand.

I chose Freud as a pioneer because I think that he engaged with so many debates at the heart of philosophy, including religion and sexuality.

I am not sure Freud should get so much credit for the concept of our subconscious? Many were working with the notion of subconscious and when we contemplate truth, we might also want to consider entire cultures have a subconscious just as individuals. That is why I make a big deal out of the Christian influence on German philosophers. Those of us living in Christian cultures can not avoid Christian thinking even if we are not Christian. Some have consdered Christianity to be morbid and Freud's notions of our sexuality are troubling.

Philosophy of the Unconscious: Speculative Results According to the Induction Method of the Physical Sciences (German: Philosophie des Unbewussten) is an 1869 book by the philosopher Eduard von Hartmann.[1] The culmination of the speculations and findings of German romantic philosophy in the first two-thirds of the 19th century, Philosophy of the Unconscious became famous.[2] By 1882, it had appeared in nine editions.[3] A three volume English translation appeared in 1884.[4] The English translation is more than 1100 pages long.[5] The work influenced Sigmund Freud's and Carl Jung's theories of the unconscious.[4][6] — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_the_Unconscious

I suspect this Western interest in a subconscious followed contact with the East.

I do not disagree and think that Freud and Jung drew upon the ideas of their time, but point to them as exponents of ideas about the unconscious. I certainly would not wish to dismiss those who paved the way for their work.

I do not disagree and think that Freud and Jung drew upon the ideas of their time, but point to them as exponents of ideas about the unconscious. I certainly would not wish to dismiss those who paved the way for their work. — Jack Cummins

It's all good. You are dealing with my female resentment of Freud's sexism and my pagan resentment of Christianity. Sometimes I am impressed by how strongly our feelings can influence our thinking. My feelings make me think we are dealing with very important ideas. I believe the East has played an important role in advancing our consciousness so I stress awareness of the Eastern philosophy.

I do take on board your expression of Freud's sexism and the ideas of Eastern philosophy and I would welcome this kind of viewpoint as this was part of the debate I was hoping to spark. I am a fan of Freud but not to the point where I would override your concerns. This a key point of the issue of whether Freud can stand or fall.

I think that Joseph Campbell is a long lost prophet but possibly too obscure for many on this site to understand.

I chose Freud as a pioneer because I think that he engaged with so many debates at the heart of philosophy, including religion and sexuality. — Jack Cummins

Well, I am iconoclastic and drawn to less obscure thoughts. I hope I am not offensive but useful in keeping the discussion alive.

And I am noticing another prejudice of mine. Following the popular guy. It does not seem right to me that we pay more attention to someone because s/he was in a position to be popular. Excluding someone like Joseph Campbell and others who effectively question Christian notions, trouble's me a lot.

Yes, I do agree ultimately. I do not consider myself as popular, but as a bit of an outsider.

If anything it is about survival. We live in a world of dog eat dog and a I have my own share of bullying and trying to resuscitate myself.

I would certainly not advocate a philosophy which elevates the popular. I do wish to advocate for many diverse and rejected philosophers. I believe that those most rejected can become the cornerstone as a Bob Marley track suggested and I would hate to think if Bob Marley was seen as below the level of the thinking of the philosophers, as in the most fundamental way he advocated the rights of all, beyond race, gender and all categories of exclusion.

One final remark, I am aware that Jung was attribute with racism against Jews and he had a certain amount of sexism too. This can be seen as a criticism of his work but is it to the point where his views should be rejected entirely?

The point I would make here is that I found meaningful in the writings of Ouspensky and passed a book onto him to a friend. I was dumbfounded when I discovered that my friend, who is gay, had latched onto a remark about homosexuality which I had barely noticed, and been thrown into an abyss of despair.

So, what I am saying is that the ideas of Freud, Jung and others have to be thrown into the cauldron of fire, juxtaposed with the relics of the Christian past as a way for a synthesis. This is a difficult endeavor with no easy answers and so returning to my thread discussion I would say simply that the ideas are a stepping stone for philosophical debate.

Yes, I do agree ultimately. I do not consider myself as popular, but as a bit of an outsider.

If anything it is about survival. We live in a world of dog eat dog and a I have my own share of bullying and trying to resuscitate myself.

I would certainly not advocate a philosophy which elevates the popular. I do wish to advocate for many diverse and rejected philosophers. I believe that those most rejected can become the cornerstone as a Bob Marley track suggested and I would hate to think if Bob Marley was seen as below the level of the thinking of the philosophers, as in the most fundamental way he advocated the rights of all, beyond race, gender and all categories of exclusion.

One final remark, I am aware that Jung was attribute with racism against Jews and he had a certain amount of sexism too. This can be seen as a criticism of his work but is it to the point where his views should be rejected entirely?

The point I would make here is that I found meaningful in the writings of Ouspensky and passed a book onto him to a friend. I was dumbfounded when I discovered that my friend, who is gay, had latched onto a remark about homosexuality which I had barely noticed, and been thrown into an abyss of despair.

So, what I am saying is that the ideas of Freud, Jung and others have to be thrown into the cauldron of fire, juxtaposed with the relics of the Christian past as a way for a synthesis. This is a difficult endeavor with no easy answers and so returning to my thread discussion I would say simply that the ideas are a stepping stone for philosophical debate. — Jack Cummins

Whoo, we are focused on dog eat dog reality, but really? Humanity has survived because we worked together to achieve what has been achieved?

In part, I think our dop eat dog mentality is the result of how we have told history. Until recently history has always been his story. Increasingly, today, his story is our story. Archeologists are giving us the story of the men and women who built the pyramids.

As for Freud's id, ego, and super ego, many years ago I bought a book for my children that refered to the child, parent, adult of transactional psychology.

According to "Simply Psychology"

According to Freud psychoanalytic theory, the id is the primitive and instinctual part of the mind that contains sexual and aggressive drives and hidden memories, the super-ego operates as a moral conscience, and the ego is the realistic part that mediates between the desires of the id and the super-ego. — Simply Psychology

Does that compare well with the child, parent, adult of transactional analyss? It does not carry the fascination with our sexuality of Freud. It is better in tune with the modern science mental development. If a child is aggressive or not, might have more to do with how the child is raised than masterbation? Did Frued even know of hormones?

I believe I experienced post trauma syndrome because I was pre-verbal when I as put in a body cast. I strongly believe past experiences are retained in our subconscious and that they have impact on our lives. What is in our subconscious can have of benefacial or destructive impact on our lives. But when it comes to Freud, he was full of prejudices and apparently pretty hung up on sex. Obviously he had an important effect on our culture but this could have been more damaging then helpful?

I perfer Socrates and his concern for expanding our consciousness and Cicero's concern with right reason, to Frued and the cultural prejudices that played into his popularity. The Father in heaven and titlating interest in our sexuality distort his work.


We might play with Freud's instinctual drives and Nietzsche's anti-Christian, superman philosophy?

You are dealing with my female resentment of Freud's sexism and my pagan resentment of Christianity — Athena

Freud was entirely dismissive of Christianity. His essays such as Totem and Taboo and The Future of an Illusion attempt to depict Christianity as a result of a kind of collective neurosis. He was throughout his life an outspoken and uncompromising atheist. Generally speaking Freud’s philosophy, such as it was, was tied to his overwhelming desire to establish himself as a scientist; his dismissive attitude of the idea of the spiritual was one of the main factors in Jung’s splitting from Freud.

What Freud developed that was seminal and useful was a psychodynamic theory of personality development. The id, ego, and superego weren't merely levels, they were interacting forces, operating in the subconscious, and under social demands, all of which has to be continually resolved by the individual. (There's more to psychodynamism, of course, than id, ego, and superego.)

Yes, Freud got penis envy wrong; it's a problem for us guys--we all have one, but envy others. We at least make comparisons whenever we get the chance. Even guys with enormous penises aren't always satisfied; as one well endowed guy confessed, "they attract too much attention".

Anyway, here's a song by somebody that doesn't have penis envy.

I like the song!

Yes, the split between Freud and Jung is interesting. Apparently, it began when the two of them were eating a meal. Freud choked on a fishbone and accused Jung of having a death wish towards him.

Freud's disagreement with Jung's approach to religion was also involved. Also, some writers have suggested that there was racial disagreement between them, pointing to Jung's underlying prejudice against Jews.

I can see Freud's weakness but enjoy reading his writings, so I dare'nt think how some may psychoanalyse me. Actually, I discovered a Primer in Freudian psychology in the library of my Roman Catholic school library, so his ideas were a liberating factor for me during adolescence.

I also did a course in art psychotherapy and this brought Freudian ideas to life. I think Freud's ideas are extremely important for psychotherapy as questions of religion and sexuality seem to figure strongly in mental illness, especially in psychotic breakdowns.

The ideas of Melanie Klein are interesting too from a psychoanalytic point of view. In particular, the ideas of splitting, projective identification, in addition to the concepts of the depressive and paranoid position.

While I was doing the art psychotherapy course I undertook personal therapy. My therapist was trained in Jungian psychotherapy. However, the therapy did incorporate some elements based on Freud's ideas. It included 50 minute sessions and four many of my sessions I lay on a couch. I found lying on the couch in therapy very wierd. I definitely think the therapy affected me permanently, mainly making me view life experiences differently and making me a bit more aware of my own blind spots.

I can see Freud's weakness but enjoy reading his writings, so I dare'nt think how some may psychoanalyse me. Actually, I discovered a Primer in Freudian psychology in the library of my Roman Catholic school library, so his ideas were a liberating factor for me during adolescence.

I also did a course in art psychotherapy and this brought Freudian ideas to life. I think Freud's ideas are extremely important for psychotherapy as questions of religion and sexuality seem to figure strongly in mental illness, especially in psychotic breakdowns.

The ideas of Melanie Klein are interesting too from a psychoanalytic point of view. In particular, the ideas of splitting, projective identification, in addition to the concepts of the depressive and paranoid position.

While I was doing the art psychotherapy course I undertook personal therapy. My therapist was trained in Jungian psychotherapy. However, the therapy did incorporate some elements based on Freud's ideas. It included 50 minute sessions and four many of my sessions I lay on a couch. I found lying on the couch in therapy very wierd. I definitely think the therapy affected me permanently, mainly making me view life experiences differently and making me a bit more aware of my own blind spots. — Jack Cummins

I should really pay more attention to what you read before making an argument but :lol: I have no self control.. I understand sex is important to some people but it is not something I recognize as important to my life. Rather the male sexual agenda is a huge irritation! Before sex became an issue, life was pretty good. We all went into the field and built forts, and just had fun. Then out of nowhere, I became a sexual object. That is like being the prey of an eagle, and it ruined everything. I am so glad that is behind me and there is a chance of having an intelligent discussion with a man, without sex being the agenda I want to avoid.

Sigmund Freud’s views on women stirred controversy during his own lifetime and continue to evoke considerable debate today. "Women oppose change, receive passively, and add nothing of their own," he wrote in a 1925 paper entitled "The Psychical Consequences of the Anatomic Distinction Between the Sexes." — https://www.verywellmind.com/how-sigmund-freud-viewed-women-2795859

Really, you don't think that was very bad for generations of women? Like what about his influence on our fight for political and economic rights, and the right to actualize ourselves? Male deomination was a terrible thing. And what did he contribute that outweighs the damage done? And speaking of his popularity, I have been pondering this, ever since mentioning comparing Freud with Neitzsche. No one gets popular without saying what people want to hear. What is it about Germany that made him, Nietzsche popular?

Nietzsche's apparent misogyny is part of his overall strategy to demonstrate that our attitudes toward sex-gender are thoroughly cultural, are often destructive of our own potential as individuals and as a species, and may be changed. — Wikipedia

I think we have done a terrible thing by replacing Greek philosophy with German philosophy!

No doubt self reflection is very important! Socrates, "know thy self." Another way to discover more about yourself is Jean Shinoda Bolen, M.D., and her book "God's in Everyman". Each God and Goddess is an arche type and if you like Jung you will like her explanation of the archetypes. I think anyone wanting to study psychology should begin with the Greek archetypes.

We must forgive Europe because they were cut off from the anciet civilizations and they only had local paganism and Christianity with Christianity clearly dominating and controlling their consciousness, and the Bible is not the best book for understanding humans because the religion is based on myth that is not a study of nature. In contrast, Greek gods and goddess are based on nature. Freud and Neitzsche are coming out of Christian consciousness. That is problematic. Starting with the Hebrews and the story of Eden, the God of Abraham was male domination over women and foreigners. The only archetype Christianity provides for women is Mother Mary. I rather be Athena and carry a sword. :grin: My favorite professor said I am a casterating bitch. Does that explain my opionon of Freud?

Freud was entirely dismissive of Christianity. His essays such as Totem and Taboo and The Future of an Illusion attempt to depict Christianity as a result of a kind of collective neurosis. He was throughout his life an outspoken and uncompromising atheist. Generally speaking Freud’s philosophy, such as it was, was tied to his overwhelming desire to establish himself as a scientist; his dismissive attitude of the idea of the spiritual was one of the main factors in Jung’s splitting from Freud. — Wayfarer

Perfect, Freud and Nietzsche agree about Christianity being a form of neurosis. They also are sexist and have stood against the self-actualization of women. Both have had a strong political and economic impact on women for many generations. Women who have entered politics since women's liberation have been changing our reality through politics. I wonder where we would be if women had also had the power they have today?

While both men opposed Christianity, they still come out a culture dominated by Christianity and that matters when considering sexism! :rage: Oh no, I didn't mean be angry. :halo: There that is better. I now look like a proper woman. :wink:

I know one person who has undertaken proper psychoanalysis. This fellow has a very vigorous / rigorous intellect, is very well read, and engages with people at a demanding high level. His two mainstay intellectual pillars are Freud and Marx. He claims that psychoanalysis helped him a great deal.

One has to undertake psychoanalysis; it isn't a therapy that can be applied to a patient in the way medication can. Any talk therapy requires the cooperation and active participation of the patient, but psychoanalysis is a major project. Surely a belief or confidence in its efficacy is essential. Stupid, neurotic thinking just has to be sorted out, and it takes a committed patient, a very insightful therapist, and time.

On the other hand, drugs for a lot of major mental illness--like bi-polar, psychosis, schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorders, etc-can be given to the patient without a whole lot of belief involved. Thorazine suppresses psychosis whether the patient believes it will work or not. All the couch time in the world isn't going to help someone who is so depressed they are catatonic.

Still, there are millions of ordinary people who are screwed up by their upbringing, life experiences, or flaws in their mental apparatuses. Unraveling how one got screwed up (like feeling intensely guilty for one's rather pedestrian sexual desires, or the ways in which one defeats one's best efforts, or why one is such a domineering son of a bitch, etc.) isn't something that medication will help.

My best guess is that it isn't so much the particular theory on which psychotherapy is based, but the commitment of the therapist and patient to work together to produce insight and a path to changing one's thinking. In the end, therapy means change, and it can take a long time. Hence the requirement for commitment to the process.

Lots of pioneers in psychology have influenced the way we think about the world (philosophy). A simple example: early on psychologists learned that a variable rate of reinforcement is far more powerful than a steady rate of reinforcement. Gambling is attractive because we win (and lose) unpredictably. If we always (or never) won at poker it wouldn't have such attraction. Variable reinforcement explains some of our thinking and behavior. Habits (little apps of learned behavior) have something to do with our success or failure in life. So on and so forth. Psychology (and people like Freud) have dethroned the autonomous self-directed person. We are not masters of our own houses.

All that should have a significant effect on philosophy.

The main thing I would say is that I don't believe that any tutor or professor could get away with calling a female student 'a castrating bitch' although you say he was your favourite so perhaps it was humour. Nevertheless, I think if it was said to many women who I know they would put in a letter of complaint. The professor might get disciplined or even dismissed for misconduct.

That is not to say that prejudice in all its forms has gone away. If anything, in this time of political correctness, prejudices are often expressed less directly but people may still feel the subtle effects of prejudice which is less overt and Freud's understanding of unconscious is a useful for thinking about the unspoken elements of interaction.

I started this discussion, not really with an intent to focus on Freud's to focus on his discussion of sexuality but of course this aspect of his writing cannot be side-stepped.

Personally I want to be reserved about discussing my own sexuality on this site because it is a public forum openly showing on the internet. I was surprised to find recently that when I googled my name all my posts and my picture were showing. I don't want to take the paranoid position but I am applying for jobs so I want to be a bit cautious. I know that I could create a pen name but I do not plan to at this stage because I have disclosed some personal information but it would be hard to find unless someone really wanted to read and read to find it. But I know that I have the option of creating a pen name and have even joked on another thread that I would choose Dr Dream. But for the time being I would rather reserve Dr Dream for a character in fiction projects.

Anyway, perhaps Freud's ideas on sexuality will be the way forward for this thread discussion. So far only a couple of people apart from you have commented on this thread so far, so I am hoping it does not die before it has even reached puberty. And, it may be a good thing if there was more discussion of sex on this site as it such a central part of life.

Yes, I believe that psychotherapy is very useful in the process of self understanding. I do believe that it is essential for self development as well therapeutic work. Counselling training as well as psychotherapy requires it but mental health nurse training does not and neither does cognitive behavioral therapy training. Psychiatric doctors don't have to have therapy but most do at least have some psychotherapy training when they are at registrar level, meaning that by the time they become consultants they will have this knowledge base to aid them in working with patients. I am speaking of the English system, so other countries may have different requirements.

There is too much emphasis on medication alone. Thorazine has been withdrawn for the last couple of decades in this country, as have many of the older antipsychotics. But, the newer drugs still have many side-effects, especially Clozapine. Many people are maintaining on a cocktail of medication, including antipsychotics and mood stabilizers and often experience a lot of weight gain and develop physical health problems, including type 2 diabetes.

Talk therapy is often encouraged but so much is about the recovery approach and about clear goals. I am not in any way opposed to this but do think therapies which involve deeper work involving examination of aspects of the subconscious is frowned upon by most mental health professionals. Of course, I realise that most people who are in the midst of an acute psychotic episode could not at this stage be expected to undertake psychoanalysis.

However, I would advocate for psychotherapy as a way of deeper understanding generally. I think the area of psychoanalysis and philosophy is fascinating. I do have an interest in the anti psychiatry tradition. Also, I am interested in the ideas of Lacan on psychoanalysis, but have not read much. But perhaps I will look for some paper books on this before England goes into a second lockdown.

I forgot to say that I completely agree with you that it is more important to find the right therapist rather than the right school of thought. When I was on an art psychotherapy course the therapist had to have a psychodynamic background and work with transference. In thinking about finding the right therapist some are lucky and find one straight away while some keep looking and can't find the person they are looking for. It makes it sound almost like looking to find a romantic partner.

Yes, the split between Freud and Jung is interesting. Apparently, it began when the two of them were eating a meal. Freud choked on a fishbone and accused Jung of having a death wish towards him. — Jack Cummins

Never heard that story, I'd be interested if you have a citation for that. The account given by Jung in his Autobiography is that 'Freud made a request: ''Promise me never to abandon the sexual theory. . . . We must make a dogma of it, an unshakable bulwark.'' Against what?, asked Jung. ''Against the black tide of mud . . . of occultism" came reply. That was given by Jung as the cause of the split.

I have committed a philosophical sin because I don't have the reference. I did the research for writing a piece for a creative non fiction writing course I was doing several years ago.

I had to get rid of piles of books when I moved earlier this year, so I am afraid it is unlikely that I have the book. Also, I discarded the piece I wrote as well and made a statement which I am unable to back up unfortunately, so I am sorry about this. But if I can find any useful clues I will get back to you.

Hey don't sweat it, but I don't think it's true. I read Memories Dreams and Reflections and a number of Freud's essays and some bios about him, and I never encountered that story.

I am sure I never dreamt it up. I haven't had Freud and Jung in my dreams yet even though I do have some strange ones.

I will be wanting to find the evidence to check my own sanity, but it may be hard on the verge of a new lockdown because it was in a paper book.

The main thing I would say is that I don't believe that any tutor or professor could get away with calling a female student 'a castrating bitch' although you say he was your favourite so perhaps it was humour. Nevertheless, I think if it was said to many women who I know they would put in a letter of complaint. The professor might get disciplined or even dismissed for misconduct.

That is not to say that prejudice in all its forms has gone away. If anything, in this time of political correctness, prejudices are often expressed less directly but people may still feel the subtle effects of prejudice which is less overt and Freud's understanding of unconscious is a useful for thinking about the unspoken elements of interaction.

I started this discussion, not really with an intent to focus on Freud's to focus on his discussion of sexuality but of course this aspect of his writing cannot be side-stepped.

Personally I want to be reserved about discussing my own sexuality on this site because it is a public forum openly showing on the internet. I was surprised to find recently that when I googled my name all my posts and my picture were showing. I don't want to take the paranoid position but I am applying for jobs so I want to be a bit cautious. I know that I could create a pen name but I do not plan to at this stage because I have disclosed some personal information but it would be hard to find unless someone really wanted to read and read to find it. But I know that I have the option of creating a pen name and have even joked on another thread that I would choose Dr Dream. But for the time being I would rather reserve Dr Dream for a character in fiction projects.

Anyway, perhaps Freud's ideas on sexuality will be the way forward for this thread discussion. So far only a couple of people apart from you have commented on this thread so far, so I am hoping it does not die before it has even reached puberty. And, it may be a good thing if there was more discussion of sex on this site as it such a central part of life. — Jack Cummins

It is my aim to encourage the success of your thread. The best I know to do, is to use a link to open up the conversation. Is there anything in the link that works for you.

How to solve the Mind-Brain Mystery with Eastern Philosophy

Oriental philosophy emphasizes phenomenological aspects of consciousness while Western philosophy emphasizes functional aspects.

Freud proposed that the mind was made up of the ego, id, and superego before the methods of behaviorism became popular. The study of behaviorism tried to resolve this by looking at the responses to a given stimulus. This was, however, a very limited scope with which to try and reconcile the subtle nuances of the mind.

The common sense and intuitive reasoning focus in folk psychology can be closely compared to Oriental philosophy but is thought to be outdated by some Western psychologists.

The German zoologist Richard Semon wrestled with the unsolved problem of memory over a hundred years ago when he first formulated the engram concept. This history of continuous attempts to produce a valid formula with which to study the human mind led to the necessity of a field of science that could study all aspects of cognition.

This was to be cognitive science which is the interdisciplinary study of the mind. Cognitive science incorporates philosophy, psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence along with robotics and neuroscience to give a more complete science with which to study the human mind and the brain.

https://medium.com/philosophy-caf%C3%A9/eastern-philosophy-and-the-mind-brain-connection-a44f9322cc0d

I will be wanting to find the evidence to check my own sanity — Jack Cummins

Having to prove one's sanity by finding a lost reference to an obscure story sounds too Kafkaesque.

"Your Honor, the defendant can't produce the reference, so Counsel recommends that the Court proceed with the involuntary commitment."

I will bear in mind the possibility of links but I am not a big fan of them and rarely open them on other people's threads.

Really, my quest is about the territory of the imagination. I visited the Freud museum in Hampstead several years ago and that inspired me looking at Freud's desk and the statues he had of mythological figures. I think his journey was about mythical dimensions.

I will probably see what happens on this thread in the next couple of days but want to exist a bit in the physical world before London's second lockdown begins. I don't want to only exist in a room using my phone and do feel a bit overwhelmed by the prospect of lockdown because it seems that life as we know it is becoming part of the mythical past.

I do feel that I am living part of an existential drama. I will try not to drown in the deep seas of the unconscious mind which I wish to explore.

Perhaps I can get locked up in the Tower of London for my losing my reference to back up the argument about Freud swallowing a fishbone and blaming Jung for having a death wish against him.

From the little that I know of Freud, it makes me want to give him my vote for creativity. Did he or did he not develop his psychological theories like scientists do - only after careful observation? I don't know but to build up theory of psychology from scratch, that too without the help of hard data, not to mention how his theory seems to work in many cases, strongly suggests Freud was deeply insightful, had a poweful imagination, learned in relevant fields, and also had luck on his side. :chin: