This is amazing. I applaud your work. I am an aspiring psychoanalyst from Argentina, and had never read such intricate and detailed analysis on the botanical dream. Thank you, I'll be sure to share this with my colleagues and friends.
I can interpret dreams, I predicted an eclipse when I had a dream of a frying pan over a gas range, and the flames were licking around it like the Corona of the sun, I say to myself, that's like the eclipse and one happened a few days after. I started having extra vivid dreams after 2012 when I was afraid of the talk about the Mayan calendar. Now I can smell and taste in my dreams and everything.
Of course I read the bible in 2012, I think the bible is a mystical book of the dead meant for prediction not morality really, not meant for everyone, maybe not for me either.
15:37 "Pointing to the relationships between elements that have not been previously connected". This corresponds to the third level of hermeneutics (or interpretation or exegesis): attention is not given to what is said literally nor to what is meant allegorically but to the "choice" of the allegories used.
@@02khal Well, that was just an observation that came to my mind. It's highly disputable. I did recently read an essay by Enzo Melandri, "La Linea e il Circolo", that goes deep into the structure of exegesis, but that book has not been translated, that I know of. I am relying on his analysis of the four (three plus one) levels of interpretation, which is the most satisfactory I ever encountered. I suspect that Peirce looked into the same problems but I don't know where specifically you can find it.
You have a really interesting youtube channel, glad that i discovered it, would take some free time out from my schedule and would watch your video on Frued.
Great video, but I have a question, we saw the themes, latents thoughts, memories of freud, but what did we conclude out of the dream? i know it sounds silly, but I am trying to leaen
The more I learn about Freud, the less he impresses me. I become more convinced he struggled much to become someone he is not. I feel he was grasping at straws. Did Freud report, ever, a singular dream that is a possible interpretation of his life? A dream that evolves from what Jung refers to as the Collective Unconscious? As I recall, Freud did not acknowledge the Collective Unconscious. I'm beginning to understand why not. Do people not acknowledge that some people outgrow their teachers or colleagues? I can give my scenario of outgrowing Eckhart Tolle. It is common knowledge that Oprah Winfrey made Eckhart famous. I'm not implying that Eckhart had nothing important to say, yet, from then on, Tolle has struggled to maintain his fame. I watched him, online, trying different processes to Enlighten his followers. Eckhart never incorporated psychology, and to this day, in my mind, has anyone become Enlightened? At one point, after Following Tolle, for perhaps a year, Tolle could not answer questions presented to him. Wanting to help him out, I answered a few. The next thing I knew, I had been banned from his channel for Copyright Infringement. And certainly, no one questioned anything. Tolle has built up an Empire that he struggles to maintain. He is likely doing more good than harm in our insane world. And no doubt the Shift he experienced in a dream was a relevant phenomenon; where would he be today, without Oprah? Meditation is good and useful. I give him that...but for Enlightenment, not so much, regardless of what his Followers believe. Freud, somehow made a name for himself that he felt compelled to maintain. And, once Freud's Followers glommed onto his theories, they too refused to see any holes.
all that circumscribed circular over intellectualized rhetoric of desire and signifiers is BS. O'Donoghue hit the mark! Freud did the right thing to end the analysis. Jews were certainly in every way under the gun!
@@finding3384 its a term freud spends a good amount of energy exploring the term unheimlich in the sense of uncanny. but given its alternate meaning of counterfeit and freuds family history of counterfeiting currency, perhaps that is why freud felt he must "reveal its secret"
Owen, you devote a lot of time in your video to Leclaire’s idea of this “nodal” point that is a (seemingly repressed) “signifier.” This “signifier”, you repeat after Leclaire, is “eissen.” Now, riddle me this... We know that the words Freud uses to associate to his dream images are German. And it is only through this lingual transcription, this “revision” (as Freud termed it), that we can hope to know anything about Freud’s dream, or can hope to know anything about any dream, for that matter. Following me? Now, to get the point across, lets pretend that Freud decided to associate to the dream in another language, perhaps French. Freud has the same exact dream, and associates the same ideational content, (e.g. the book, the cocaine, etc.) but this time in French. Now, the “signifiers” that show up still express the exact same ideational content, but are of different phonetical sound. The sound “eissen” is not a part of the ideational representatives no longer. How would LeClaire explain this dream then? Wouldn’t his whole argument turn out to be... a load of rubbish?
Hi Ali, well one problem with that suggestion would be that it’s counterfactual. Freud addresses this criticism in the Introductory Lectures (SE XV, p.48-49) where he says if you ask someone what they associate with abc and they say xyz you can’t dismiss that on the grounds that it could just as well have been anything else. You have to respect the fact that THIS is what occurred to the dreamer rather than anything else. The comparison Freud uses is from chemistry - say you wanted to find out the weight of something, you placed it on the scales and took the reading, you wouldn’t be able to dismiss that reading on the basis that it could just as well have weighed anything else. In terms of your reference to language - I think you’re confusing A language (German, French) with language per se (as a structure of differential signifiers). It’s the structure we’re interested in here, and that’s what you see at work in how the dream is constructed. Sure, Freud can have ideas about books, cocaine, etc in German, French, or English. But the dream is not built according to an individual language but language as a signifying structure. To illustrate this, one of the associations Freud makes to the screen memory of the girl with the flowers which he connects to this dream is the French term ‘pissenlit’ (‘dandelion’ in English). The yellow of the dandelions evokes the yellow of the girl’s dress, if I remember correctly (Leclaire actually writes about this in his paper but I chose to leave it out of the video for the sake of brevity). Freud sees that ‘pissenlit’ is a signifier and connects it to the memory of wetting his bed as a child and his father telling him he’ll never amount to anything - ‘piss en lit’ in French translates to ‘piss the bed’ in English. So you see how the ‘dream-work’ as Freud calls it uses the signifier totally irrespective of what language it’s in, only because as a signifier it connects thoughts (ideational content) from different contexts (two memories from childhood, represented by one signifier) that wouldn’t otherwise find conscious connection. As you know, this is what Freud calls condensation. Your point was premised on the idea of connecting thoughts in one language to signifiers in the same language. But as this example shows, that would be to miss the point. Hope that helps. Owen
It is a really interesting discussion. I think what Freud means by language is not restricted to the so-called alphabetic letter. There are numerous linguistic systems such as pictography, ideography, hieroglyphic, phonetic, alphabetic language, etc., which have undergone the non-linear phases of development according to each civilization. In brief, Freud’s concept of language should be considered to be the psychic apparatus which represents things and matters in a strati-graphic mode.
You're referring to the autonomy of the signifier, not the difference between parole and langue. Both are structural, the material of the dreamwork and the associations made by the dreamer are expressed by and in the speaker's parole, which is determined by langue. Making a connection between signifying functions from the material presented is drawing from parole, if you were analysing langue it wouldn't be subjective and it wouldn't have any value for the analysand since you would be simply analysing the language system as such; e.g., the example you gave about pissing the bed is a meaningful connection for the subject, not the language system. It is dependent on the language system, since parole depends on langue for its condition of possibility, but you are dealing with the structural relationships exhibited by one's parole, since the signifying functions you are interested cannot be reduced to properties of the language system as such but are expressions of the analysand (and the subject).
Fascinating, I really like the way this is put together. A lot of information, but does not seem overwhelming. Great work, I hope to see some more!
I say that as a video maker who knows quite a few things in the platform. This video is criminally underrated it deserve so many more 🌟
Wonderful! this video deserves more views!
This is amazing. I applaud your work. I am an aspiring psychoanalyst from Argentina, and had never read such intricate and detailed analysis on the botanical dream. Thank you, I'll be sure to share this with my colleagues and friends.
I was reading the Interpretation of Dreams. Perfect timing! Thank you.
What a gem of an analysis and presentation. Thank you!
Once more, exceptional work! Thank you!
such high quality
Amazing figure in the world of psychology. I always learn something new from his texts.
I can interpret dreams, I predicted an eclipse when I had a dream of a frying pan over a gas range, and the flames were licking around it like the Corona of the sun, I say to myself, that's like the eclipse and one happened a few days after. I started having extra vivid dreams after 2012 when I was afraid of the talk about the Mayan calendar. Now I can smell and taste in my dreams and everything.
Of course I read the bible in 2012, I think the bible is a mystical book of the dead meant for prediction not morality really, not meant for everyone, maybe not for me either.
Fantastic video. Thank you!
speculations given by O'Donoghue of Freud's dream cut short by Freud and the fraudulent activity of family member(s) has more of a punch.
This is a masterpiece of explanation, condensed … Like a dream !
thank u for making these! pure brilliant.
15:37 "Pointing to the relationships between elements that have not been previously connected". This corresponds to the third level of hermeneutics (or interpretation or exegesis): attention is not given to what is said literally nor to what is meant allegorically but to the "choice" of the allegories used.
Can you suggest some reading on this ?
@@02khal Well, that was just an observation that came to my mind. It's highly disputable.
I did recently read an essay by Enzo Melandri, "La Linea e il Circolo", that goes deep into the structure of exegesis, but that book has not been translated, that I know of. I am relying on his analysis of the four (three plus one) levels of interpretation, which is the most satisfactory I ever encountered. I suspect that Peirce looked into the same problems but I don't know where specifically you can find it.
@@lucassiccardi8764 I see. I can start looking for Enzo Melandri and Searls.
Thank you !
@@02khal Wait! It's Peirce, not Searle!
@@lucassiccardi8764 Alright ! Thanks a lot !
this was quite a ride, brilliant video!
Great video, can you make more videos about Lacan?
Amazing, amazing, amazing. Thanks a million times. really. We appreciate it a lot. please keep going
Extremely interesting, thank you!
You have a really interesting youtube channel, glad that i discovered it, would take some free time out from my schedule and would watch your video on Frued.
Superb! Thank you
Great video, but I have a question, we saw the themes, latents thoughts, memories of freud, but what did we conclude out of the dream? i know it sounds silly, but I am trying to leaen
Wow wow. Nice job man! This video must've been so much effort.
I liked now you have 500 👍
Thanks for this informative video. Is there's a translation of LeClaire's paper in English?
Yes, see the link in the video description. The paper is in that collection - that's the one I quote from in the video. Owen
So enlightening.
_a resplendent making! _*_subscribed_*
Wow. Just, amazing
Excellent
Brilliant!
This is gold!
The more I learn about Freud, the less he impresses me. I become more convinced he struggled much to become someone he is not. I feel he was grasping at straws.
Did Freud report, ever, a singular dream that is a possible interpretation of his life? A dream that evolves from what Jung refers to as the Collective Unconscious? As I recall, Freud did not acknowledge the Collective Unconscious.
I'm beginning to understand why not.
Do people not acknowledge that some people outgrow their teachers or colleagues? I can give my scenario of outgrowing Eckhart Tolle. It is common knowledge that Oprah Winfrey made Eckhart famous. I'm not implying that Eckhart had nothing important to say, yet, from then on, Tolle has struggled to maintain his fame. I watched him, online, trying different processes to Enlighten his followers. Eckhart never incorporated psychology, and to this day, in my mind, has anyone become Enlightened?
At one point, after Following Tolle, for perhaps a year, Tolle could not answer questions presented to him. Wanting to help him out, I answered a few. The next thing I knew, I had been banned from his channel for Copyright Infringement. And certainly, no one questioned anything. Tolle has built up an Empire that he struggles to maintain. He is likely doing more good than harm in our insane world. And no doubt the Shift he experienced in a dream was a relevant phenomenon; where would he be today, without Oprah?
Meditation is good and useful. I give him that...but for Enlightenment, not so much, regardless of what his Followers believe. Freud, somehow made a name for himself that he felt compelled to maintain. And, once Freud's Followers glommed onto his theories, they too refused to see any holes.
Good point
I don't get it
We want more videos pleaseeee
his ............. heart
Fell asleep watching this
all that circumscribed circular over intellectualized rhetoric of desire and signifiers is BS. O'Donoghue hit the mark! Freud did the right thing to end the analysis. Jews were certainly in every way under the gun!
I think you will find Sandman by Neil gaiman really interesting, I recommend it.
Brilliant
17:01
That was fucking amazing.
Pretty freundlich
1:35 he was good in neurology he recommended taking heroin l think for his friend Bauer.
Impressive!
Unheimlich as ‘counterfeit’ is incredibly insteresting
Why?
@@finding3384 its a term freud spends a good amount of energy exploring the term unheimlich in the sense of uncanny. but given its alternate meaning of counterfeit and freuds family history of counterfeiting currency, perhaps that is why freud felt he must "reveal its secret"
Good work. Still, quite a stretch of the imagination.
Shouldn't this series be called "Freud Online"?
So it takes two scholars to break down one dream? How disheartening.
What's disheartening about 2 points of view? I find that quite admirable.
And how do you objectively interpret a dream but by definition it will be just an interpretation.
Owen, you devote a lot of time in your video to Leclaire’s idea of this “nodal” point that is a (seemingly repressed) “signifier.” This “signifier”, you repeat after Leclaire, is “eissen.”
Now, riddle me this... We know that the words Freud uses to associate to his dream images are German. And it is only through this lingual transcription, this “revision” (as Freud termed it), that we can hope to know anything about Freud’s dream, or can hope to know anything about any dream, for that matter. Following me?
Now, to get the point across, lets pretend that Freud decided to associate to the dream in another language, perhaps French. Freud has the same exact dream, and associates the same ideational content, (e.g. the book, the cocaine, etc.) but this time in French. Now, the “signifiers” that show up still express the exact same ideational content, but are of different phonetical sound. The sound “eissen” is not a part of the ideational representatives no longer. How would LeClaire explain this dream then? Wouldn’t his whole argument turn out to be... a load of rubbish?
Hi Ali, well one problem with that suggestion would be that it’s counterfactual. Freud addresses this criticism in the Introductory Lectures (SE XV, p.48-49) where he says if you ask someone what they associate with abc and they say xyz you can’t dismiss that on the grounds that it could just as well have been anything else. You have to respect the fact that THIS is what occurred to the dreamer rather than anything else. The comparison Freud uses is from chemistry - say you wanted to find out the weight of something, you placed it on the scales and took the reading, you wouldn’t be able to dismiss that reading on the basis that it could just as well have weighed anything else.
In terms of your reference to language - I think you’re confusing A language (German, French) with language per se (as a structure of differential signifiers). It’s the structure we’re interested in here, and that’s what you see at work in how the dream is constructed. Sure, Freud can have ideas about books, cocaine, etc in German, French, or English. But the dream is not built according to an individual language but language as a signifying structure. To illustrate this, one of the associations Freud makes to the screen memory of the girl with the flowers which he connects to this dream is the French term ‘pissenlit’ (‘dandelion’ in English). The yellow of the dandelions evokes the yellow of the girl’s dress, if I remember correctly (Leclaire actually writes about this in his paper but I chose to leave it out of the video for the sake of brevity). Freud sees that ‘pissenlit’ is a signifier and connects it to the memory of wetting his bed as a child and his father telling him he’ll never amount to anything - ‘piss en lit’ in French translates to ‘piss the bed’ in English. So you see how the ‘dream-work’ as Freud calls it uses the signifier totally irrespective of what language it’s in, only because as a signifier it connects thoughts (ideational content) from different contexts (two memories from childhood, represented by one signifier) that wouldn’t otherwise find conscious connection. As you know, this is what Freud calls condensation. Your point was premised on the idea of connecting thoughts in one language to signifiers in the same language. But as this example shows, that would be to miss the point. Hope that helps. Owen
It is a really interesting discussion. I think what Freud means by language is not restricted to the so-called alphabetic letter. There are numerous linguistic systems such as pictography, ideography, hieroglyphic, phonetic, alphabetic language, etc., which have undergone the non-linear phases of development according to each civilization. In brief, Freud’s concept of language should be considered to be the psychic apparatus which represents things and matters in a strati-graphic mode.
You're referring to the autonomy of the signifier, not the difference between parole and langue. Both are structural, the material of the dreamwork and the associations made by the dreamer are expressed by and in the speaker's parole, which is determined by langue. Making a connection between signifying functions from the material presented is drawing from parole, if you were analysing langue it wouldn't be subjective and it wouldn't have any value for the analysand since you would be simply analysing the language system as such; e.g., the example you gave about pissing the bed is a meaningful connection for the subject, not the language system. It is dependent on the language system, since parole depends on langue for its condition of possibility, but you are dealing with the structural relationships exhibited by one's parole, since the signifying functions you are interested cannot be reduced to properties of the language system as such but are expressions of the analysand (and the subject).
W dream ASD lol
xXx
Pseudoscience