Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I do not believe all psychoanalysis to be pseudoscience, though I will grant you that both Freud and Reich went off the rails after promising beginnings.
For instance, Freud on parapraxis. What is pseudoscientific about that?
Modern medicine is also at fault by treating things in isolation and failing to see both social and psychological connections. Modern medicine is mostly pill-pushing for profit. Allende knew that.The article you said you liked today was written, remember, by a Reichian therapist.
Well, if it’s in the biography that you read that his wife said he was a pervert, then it’s a biography repeating myths.
Reich on Freud.
” The Minna Bernays Controversy”
So what? Are we shocked prudes now about adultery and affairs? This is all of no importance. “Ooh dear, how awwwful.”
AI Overview
No, there is no historical record of Sigmund Freud’s wife, Martha Bernays, calling him a “pervert.”
However, this myth likely stems from a conflation of two well-documented historical facts regarding her view of his work:
• She called his work “pornography”: While Martha was a devoted wife who managed their household, she was a deeply conservative and Orthodox-raised woman. She was famously uncomfortable with his fixation on sexual motivations and explicitly referred to his psychological writings and theories as “pornography”.
• The public called him a pervert: Because Freud’s theories centered heavily on taboo topics like infantile sexuality, the Oedipus complex, and repressed desires, the general public and the contemporary medical community frequently labeled Freud himself as a pervert or obsessed with filth.
While Martha disliked the explicit nature of his research and largely refused to engage with his psychoanalytic theories, she remained his supportive partner for over 53 years until his death.AI Overview
Economist Jeffrey Sachs has frequently warned that the world is in the early stages of World War III and faces an unprecedented risk of a nuclear apocalypse. Critics accuse Sachs of promoting fear and amplifying “Armageddon” rhetoric, arguing that his commentary aligns with Kremlin talking points designed to intimidate the West into abandoning its support for Ukraine. Conversely, supporters view his warnings as a necessary, realistic alarm against catastrophic military escalation.The Basis of Sachs’s Warnings
In lectures, media appearances, and podcast discussions (such as his analysis of Annie Jacobsen’s book Nuclear War: A Scenario), Sachs argues that modern geopolitical tensions have pushed humanity closer to nuclear annihilation than at any point in history.
His core arguments include:
• The “Doomsday Clock” Analogy: Sachs frequently highlights that the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has set the Doomsday Clock closer to midnight than ever before, reflecting a state of severe global instability.
• Historical Precedents: Drawing parallels to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, Sachs asserts that leaders are ignoring the historical lessons of John F. Kennedy, who chose diplomacy and compromise over total war.
• Proxy Conflicts and Over-Escalation: He maintains that the United States and NATO are engaging in an “omnicidal escalation” by continuously expanding military lines and deploying advanced weaponry in Ukraine and the Middle East, which could accidentally trigger a full-scale nuclear winter.Today, instead of sexuality being a wide and embracing term, our need for compartmentalism has reduced it to the physical mechanics of sex acts and coitus. This has even become a virtue.
“He’s a family man” means he is a good man and trustworthy. “He’s a loner” means he fits the profile for everything bad; he should be avoided.
Similarly, deep loving relationships without physical sex are diminished: “That’s not a relationship. That’s JUST friendship” – emphasis on JUST,
i. e. nothing. The word “relationship” now only means having sex. “What would you know about love? You’ve never done it!”I agree, except 1) what is a “pervert”? and 2) if someone were a “pervert” it wouldn’t mean all their ideas and writings are invalid.
De Sade was a proto-socialist. Most people today would also call him a “pervert.” Also, what is perverse in one era, place and society is not considered perverse in another.
Homosexuality was normal in ancient Europe, then for 1,500 years it was perverse; now it is normal again.
Edgar Allan Poe’s wife was 13. Should I stop enjoying his stories and poems? Should I burn them and shout “Pervert!”?
I think there are things we can take from Freud, and other things we can reject. The same with Reich.
This is the case with other writers and thinkers. It’s called discernment.I am angered when I hear academics and “experts” sounding off about things and, yes, generalising, when I know my experience of life completely refutes them. They’ve probably buried their own childhood memories, as so many adults do.
I know I’m a human animal, and as a human animal, my feelings and emotional experience in life can’t be totally different from that of others. I used to think it was, but as I read, seeking kindred spirits in other people’s recorded experiences and thoughts, I realised my own were not so unique or bizarre, but that many shared my own or similar feelings and thoughts. No man, no being, is an island.
I know my feelings and memories. You do not. You are not me.
I do not invent memories after reading novels.
Instead, reading has introduced me to people who have shared similar experiences and expressed them.
My own experiences prove that romantic feelings and fantasies known by adults as sexual in origin do not just begin with puberty, regardless of what your academics say. I go by what life has shown me, not people with degrees and doctorates. So now who’s the bookish snob?
Plus you cannot help but finish any message to me with a diminishing jibe. I find you a very offensive person.
