Here we are reading from the penultimate volume in Freud's collected works vol 22(24 is just an index)..and he makes a remark about those in prison institutions, conmen, and I wonder if they are more receptive to his works than anyone else? This has some relevance if we note the popular books of John Grisham whoose novels I enjoy psychiatrists often come to court saying this or that about some criminal usually based in the chicago area and the accused calls it slander and do not always accept their diagnosis? Here we have a controversial work taking up old interests such as religion and science, philosophy, mental health femininity and war and I will conclude with the recent gun controversey in america a topical issue?
When reading these books the more versed you are in philosophy the better you will understand, at an optimal level.
PP 245-46 deals with a person viewing a scene the acropolis(the author) feeling depersonalized and derealized..scenes not seeming 'real' and it may be associated with depersonalization(textbook of psychiatry 1940
listed also discusses this issue)..(fausse reconaissance, deja vu,deja reconte)..all these ideas seem relevant today.
In terms of language a cogent discussion appears on p 20"linguistic instruments..conjunctions and prepositions, conjugations..representing them,primitive language without and grammar"..then "condensed into new unities(middle age studies of universals helps him see this)transforming the thoughts into pictures. NOte primitive and thoughts into pictures like a movie..you may do this but why? On p 23 "turning abstract thoughts into visual pictures" reducing and simplifying them and yet not properly understanding them in their proper context and losing them and their reality in ways..
On p 59 "mental patients are split and broken. He then discusses phenomenon and the philosopher Kant who has had a large influence on his work not only his science but morals. He states "the conscience within us with the starry heaven"(p 60; see Kant's critique of pure reason). There are also discussions on attachment identity and sex which was preceded by Kant. HIs psychology is a metapsychology as distinct from materialistic sciences and philosophies not only communism, but also much traditional analyses in traditional sciences, and the way he utilized discusions such as alienation he uses the word in a different sense and the discussion is centereed in a different way than a communist or a sociologist or mental health person may use it (may, everyone is different, but the professions may have a code they are bound by, I dont know). His famous saying on p 80 "where id was ego shall be." Thats his morals. Making the person less sensual and more idea oriented and focused, and encouraging desexualization. In terms of the ego being increased and the id decreased as a quanta of energy(an analogy he makes). He also mentions the work of Schopenhauer..in terms of the way society is..will, strong individuals, dominating, mastery,..the list goes on? Then he sais "eat or be eaten"..you may disagree and he ends on destruction and how it often remains interiorized and finds an outlet in an acceptable way which may be pathological and the perpetrator may even have a functional role as some authority. THere is a long discussion on femininity and his discussion ends with finding a unique development not so much marked by malles or even other females or society and nowadays we call this autonomous..which is an idea taken up in a different way and you may become religious or philosophical or form friendships but its first from detaching all and then reconstructing..a high IQ and strong transpersonal development and ability helps in this regard. Many have errorsa of "superimposition"(115). He discusses aggression and love appearing in a little girl within the personality and as it ages..one increases at the expense of the other and you must understand this in terms of his quanta of energy..a fixed amount of energy. There is much talk in female psychology which I would use the term modelling(which he doesnt). As a male he attempts to be sensitive, and what he really is discussing is personal education, but in the last resort everyone has the right to be what they want to be to model themselves on whom they want male or female. "If you want to know more about femininity inquire from your own experiences..turn to poets"(p 135)..in its ideal form. There is much discussion on other matters science and mental health and religion and the link each has to reality and limits. How technology makes obsessional neurotics of many..and a discussion with Einstein on war, and they have taken up positions contrary to each other with Einstein incensed at the personality profile Freud has drawn of scientists/authority and how it works in present day society which he contrasts with community and democracy. There is much more to discuss for those who like to read..regarding gun violence the ultimate decision rather than an authority should rest with the community whether we like it or not not some outside authority even in the U.S> outside the country..whether a decision is good or bad its ultimately imposed and contrary to community values..even scientific intrusions in society are not advocated but the authority of the community..right or wrong? how does this relate to superimposition? These are the contents of this volumw and much more..the final volume is a profile on MOses as a figure and nationalist hero..