Sigmund Freud

[Lord Daedra]

Is the man still the secular saint of knowledge or has he been shat upon by the enlightening passage of time?

[Rugged Collectivist]

My high school psychology teacher liked to talk shit about him. He seems to have a huge following amongst intellectuals that no one has ever heard of.

Personally, I don't know enough about the man to really comment.

[subcp]

His influence and impact, along with his numerous disciples, is still felt today if that's what you mean. Psychoanalysis was being developed when the worker's movement had taken on mass dimensions, and was becoming more prominent after the October Revolution- Trotsky and other Old Bolsheviks wrote about Freud and psychoanalysis, Wilhelm Reich, as a member of the KPD opened up at least 1 free clinic in a working-class neighborhood in urban Germany (he was a favorite target of the Nazis; Reich was Jewish, a Communist, and a psychoanalyst). Lacan was referenced during shifts in the French intellectual establishment by people like Althusser. Plus their influence on the Frankfurt School intellectuals.

Are you asking in general or about the relationship between Marxism and psychoanalysis in particular?

[Questionable]

Is he really that useful to the proletariat? I always thought something like behaviorism or Leo Vygotsky's historical-cultural psychology was more useful in a Marxist context.

[Lord Daedra]

1. I want to know the connections and enmities between Marxism and Freud

2. I want to know how psychology has progressed since him (what is the dominant theory)

ps And yes i know how lazy and counteraffective many psychologists have become due to their focus on treatment instead of cures.

[Comrade #138672]

1. I want to know the connections and enmities between Marxism and Freud

2. I want to know how psychology has progressed since him (what is the dominant theory)

ps And yes i know how lazy and counteraffective many psychologists have become due to their focus on treatment instead of cures.So you want to know about Freudo-Marxism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudo-Marxism). It's very interesting, indeed. Although, it is still very controversial among Marxists.


Freudo-Marxism is a loose designation of several twentieth-century critical theory schools of thought that sought to synthesize the philosophy and political economy of Karl Marx with the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud.
Freudo-Marxism seeks to use the tools of psychoanalysis to diagnose the ills of society. Just as Freudianism views an individual's ego and super-ego as shaped by his unconscious id, Marxism views a society's culture and institutions as shaped by its underlying economic system. Thus a society's economic system and its relations of production function as its unconscious id; a society's culture functions as its ego; and a society's legal system, police and military function as its super-ego. From this point, Freudo-Marxism aims to reveal the illness of a society's underlying economic system by analyzing its cultural products.Taken from Wikipedia.


Is he really that useful to the proletariat? I always thought something like behaviorism or Leo Vygotsky's historical-cultural psychology was more useful in a Marxist context.Actually, as far as I know, behaviorism has been developed to control the proletariat.

[Lord Daedra]

Cool. Now what is the current prevailing psychological method in today's capitalist world and how does it relate to Freud?

[Comrade #138672]

Cool. Now what is the current prevailing psychological method in today's capitalist world and how does it relate to Freud?It's all about neurology now. Just fix (control) the brain chemicals and you are done.

[Kenco Smooth]

Cool. Now what is the current prevailing psychological method in today's capitalist world and how does it relate to Freud?

Whilst there's no single defining theory due to the branching out of psychology over the last century the generally held understanding of the mind is based in cognitive-neuroscience. That is the mind is understood by rough analogy to a computer system, information goes in, is stored and altered based on certain parameters, and then output is sent out at various stages. These processes are taken to be based on neurological structures and processes. That's taken more or less universally and forms the basis of experimental practice.

Quite simply it doesn't relate to Freud's. His work has been left more or less completely behind amongst scientific practitioners.



Actually, as far as I know, behaviorism has been developed to control the proletariat.

...or as a response to perceived subjectivity in the study of behaviour. No need to postulate massive conspiracies.

[Questionable]

Actually, as far as I know, behaviorism has been developed to control the proletariat.

Nearly everything has been developed for social control in capitalism. That doesn't tell us anything about the actual theory.

The tenets of behaviorism is that there is no such thing as static human nature, that people's relationship with their environment is what defines their behavior. Sound familiar?

If behaviorism is true, simply not believing in it won't do anything to change how humans are. Ignoring it won't make humans free somehow.

[Kenco Smooth]

Nearly everything has been developed for social control in capitalism. That doesn't tell us anything about the actual theory.

The tenets of behaviorism is that there is no such thing as static human nature, that people's relationship with their environment is what defines their behavior. Sound familiar?

If behaviorism is true, simply not believing in it won't do anything to change how humans are. Ignoring it won't make humans free somehow.

A lot of behaviourism has gotten brought into modern practice as undoubtedly the right way to do things but the majority of the assumptions of the program have not aged well. The widespread use of twin studies and recently genetic analysis since the 1950s shows many mental characteristics to be heritable to varying degrees. Also the success of cognitive psychology shows the claim that we can't study the workings of the mind to be incorrect.

The last line of your post hits the nail on the head though. Whatever the human mind is, it is. If people insist on building political programs around outdated science they build it on foundations of sand.

[Questionable]

A lot of behaviourism has gotten brought into modern practice as undoubtedly the right way to do things but the majority of the assumptions of the program have not aged well. The widespread use of twin studies and recently genetic analysis since the 1950s shows many mental characteristics to be heritable to varying degrees. Also the success of cognitive psychology shows the claim that we can't study the workings of the mind to be incorrect.

There's many different sub-varieties of behaviorism. The Pavlovian style of Behaviorism is what you're describing. There's also "Radical Behaviorism" put forth by BF Skinner (If I'm not mistaken, I could be getting the names and terms confused but I definitely read about it) where the mind is taken into account, but cognitive processes are still seen as the result of outside sources and don't exist as special independent things. Again, pretty similar to the Marxist position.