Sigmund Freud: Scientific Trailblazer or Huckster?

By JOHN WEIR,
Inconvenient History:
A Quarterly Journal for Free Historical Inquiry,

Published by CODOH

“If only Americans knew, we are bringing them the plague!”
— Sigmund Freud to Carl Jung, on the ship bringing them to America


Sigismund (Sigmund) Schlomo Freud (1856-1939) has been rated as the sixth-most-influential scientist in world history.[1] Medical historian Elizabeth M. Thornton writes: “Probably no single individual has had a more profound effect on 20th-century thought than Sigmund Freud.”[2] This article examines whether Freud deserves such notoriety—or perhaps its opposite.

Early Years and Ambition

Sigmund Freud was born May 6, 1856 at Freiberg in Moravia. As early as 1872, Freud used the signature Sigmund for his first name, and he never used his middle name. Although not religious, Freud insisted that he never lost his feeling of solidarity with the Jewish people. Freud’s Jewish identity was never in question, and he repeatedly acknowledged it publicly.[3]

Freud moved to an overcrowded Jewish quarter in Vienna at Age Four. Freud’s parents both agreed that Sigmund was exceptional and encouraged his future greatness in every possible way. He was the only member of his family to have the use of his own room for privacy and study. Freud occupied this room until he moved to hospital quarters in his 20s.[4]

Freud at Age Nine enrolled at the newly established Sperl Gymnasium in Leopoldstadt, one year ahead of the normal entrance age. Freud was commended for his outstanding academic work as well as for his exemplary conduct at the school. He showed great talent for language and literature, mastering Latin, Greek, French, English, and later Spanish and Italian. Freud wrote that he was at the top of his class for seven years.[5]

Freud from an early age had a passionate desire to achieve fame, to become a great man, and to be, in his own words, a “hero.” Freud relied on his powerful linguistic skills to create his heroic self. The young boy who had lived in the world of books became a masterful stylist, capable of presenting his ideas in compelling prose. He lived most intensely when he was writing. Freud used his literary skills to shape his personal legend as well as the history of the psychoanalytic movement.[6]

Frederick Crews summarizes the purpose of Freud’s writings:

The aim isn’t to solve a problem but to put Freud himself in the most favorable light, either as a seasoned inquirer, a recognized associate of a leading figure, or a discoverer who will soon reveal an important truth. In his drive to become famous for something, Freud saw himself falling behind the most creative and rigorous thinkers in his field. His only recourse was to attach himself sycophantically to great reputations and then to undermine them, leaving himself positioned as our sole guide to a wiser course.[7]

As early as 1885, before Freud had done any work of real prominence, he was already concerned with obscuring the details of his life. He wrote to his future wife, Martha Bernays: “I have destroyed all my notes of the past 14 years, as well as letters, scientific excerpts, and the manuscripts of my papers…As for the biographers, let them worry, we have no desire to make it easy for them. Each one of them will be right in his opinion of ‘The Development of the Hero,’ and I am already looking forward to seeing them go astray.” Freud conducted several later purges of his papers and, toward the end of his life, attempted to destroy important letters written in the years of his self-analysis.[8]

Medical Doctor

Freud moved into quarters at the Vienna General Hospital in 1882 and spent the next three years acquiring medical experience. His training at the general hospital was the equivalent of what would today be called a medical internship and residency. He acquired familiarity with different conditions and treatment methods in surgery, internal medicine, dermatology, ophthalmology, psychiatry and nervous disorders.[9]

Freud opened his medical practice as a neurologist treating mentally disturbed patients on Easter Sunday in 1886. His new medical practice grew very slowly.[10] Freud’s concern with the financial status of his patients dominated during his first years of practice. This led him to accept patients he should have referred to other doctors.[11]

For example, Hugo Thimig, a well-known local actor, contacted Freud in May 1886 complaining of dysfunction and pain in his wrist. Instead of referring Thimig to a qualified orthopedic surgeon, Freud applied his scalpel to Thimig’s wrist despite his lack of surgical skill. Predictably, the operation was unsuccessful. Freud had overridden normal medical precautions, and placed Thimig’s health in needless jeopardy.[12]

Like other physicians of his time, Freud relied on pain-deadening drugs to treat both ordinary anxiety and a number of other conditions. What distinguished Freud from most of his fellow doctors was the use of cocaine as his panacea of choice. Neither the disastrous results of the use of cocaine to attempt to treat his friend Ernst Fleischl von Marxow nor the warnings appearing in the medical press deterred Freud from continuing to medicate his patients with cocaine.[13]

Freud used cocaine for a wide variety of conditions. For example, Freud injected cocaine directly into the affected site of a sciatica patient over an 11-day period. The patient became euphoric, and Freud predictably declared the man cured. However, we know for certain that cocaine does not cure sciatica. Freud spared himself any unpleasant surprises regarding side effects, addiction, or relapses from the treatment, and continued to treat his patients with cocaine for numerous illnesses and disorders.[14]

The most-fundamental defect in Freud’s medical practice, however, was not his choice of improper remedies; it was his inability to make correct diagnoses. Freud’s inclination was to diagnose the patient with whatever ailment was preoccupying Freud at that moment. From 1887 into the 1890s, his choice was usually hysteria. Even when a patient was subsequently shown to have an organic disease, Freud still maintained that hysteria was part of the clinical picture.[15]

Psychoanalysis

Freud emerged as the world’s first psychoanalyst with the publication of his book The Interpretation of Dreams on November 4, 1899. He published three of the fundamental texts of psychoanalysis between 1900 and 1905: The Psychopathology of Everyday Life (1901), Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), and Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious (1905). Freud also published numerous case histories, papers and essays on a variety of clinical and nonclinical subjects, and in 1913 published Totem and Taboo, which was his first major application of psychoanalysis to another discipline—in this case, anthropology.[16]

The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, which is probably Freud’s most-popular and accessible book, introduced to the world the concept of the Freudian slip. A Freudian slip, also called parapraxis, includes slips of the tongue (using a different word for the one intended), slips of the pen, misreading, and mishearing. Freud accepted physical elements as capable of facilitating a parapraxis, but not as causing one. Freud concluded this book by making the connection among dreams, neuroses, and parapraxes explicit, and by stating that we are “all a little neurotic.”[17]

Freud’s book Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality is primarily concerned with the sexual instinct, which he called libido and viewed as a basic biological need like hunger. He later evolved the concept of the Oedipus complex. The Oedipus complex was defined as a child’s feelings of desire for his or her opposite-sex parent and jealousy and anger toward his or her same-sex parent. Freud came to present this childhood neurosis as the rule, not the exception.[18]

Freud said to his friend Wilhelm Fliess that sexuality is “the key that unlocks everything.” He acknowledged, however, that he was pretty much alone in his thinking. Freud stated that his colleagues looked upon him as pretty much of a monomaniac, although he had the distinct feeling that he had touched upon one of the great secrets of nature. Freud was basing his conclusions primarily on his moods and intuition rather than verifiable clinical data.[19]

Freud’s use of moods and intuition forged psychoanalysis into the artful milieu of an ambiguous science. Freud said to his American pupil Smiley Blanton: “In developing a new science, one has to make its theories vague. You cannot make things clear-cut.” In psychoanalysis, Freud had developed an interpretive free-for-all that was safely detached from testable propositions.[20]

Psychoanalytic Movement

Freud’s books and lectures began to attract the attention of a small group of physicians and intellectuals in Vienna. Beginning in the early 1900s, they came to Freud’s office on Wednesday evenings for discussions of psychoanalysis. This “Wednesday Society” generated lively discussions in which all members participated. The Wednesday Society by 1906 had grown to almost 20 members, almost all of them Jewish, about 12 of whom attended on any given evening.[21]

Freud also attracted visitors from other cities. One of them was Carl Jung, a young psychiatrist on the staff of a hospital in Zurich, Switzerland, where he was the assistant to the renowned schizophrenia expert Eugen Bleuler. Jung came to Vienna in 1907 and was greatly impressed with Freud’s stature and brilliance. Bringing in Jung and his colleagues in Zurich was important to Freud because they were all Gentiles, and carried the prestige of official psychiatry.[22]

Freud was concerned that psychoanalysis not be branded as a purely Jewish science. Jung was extremely important to Freud because Jung provided a bridge to the Gentile world. Because Jung was a Gentile, Jung was the only important member of the early group of psychoanalysts whom Freud thought could command respect from the outside world.[23]

The Wednesday Society was renamed the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society in 1908. With contacts in Europe and America, 42 psychoanalysts attended its first international meeting in Salzburg, Austria. Freud’s creative accomplishments in psychoanalysis had opened up a new world of understanding and therapy. However, Freud’s intolerance for the ideas of others soon erupted in internal battles with his colleagues.[24]

Freud had formed the Vienna Society as a forum to discuss his ideas. Freud was sympathetic to new ideas only if he could appropriate them into his existing theories. Alfred Adler had worked within the society from its inception, but as Adler developed his own ideas, Freud forced him to leave. Freud wrote to Carl Jung: “Rather tired after battle and victory, I hereby inform you that yesterday I forced the whole Adler gang to resign from the society.”[25]

When Jung published a book that raised questions about Freud’s theory of sexuality, Freud again became intolerant and set loose forces that would destroy their friendship. Freud labeled Jung’s ideas as “abnormality” and “illness,” and wrote to Jung that “we abandon our personal relations entirely.” Jung accepted Freud’s proposal, and Jung was forced out as president of the International Psychoanalytic Association. Not content to attack Jung solely in his private correspondence, Freud published books in which he dismissed Jung’s original contributions as “fairy tales” and “occultism.”[26]

World War I seemed to validate Freud’s vision of man as an irrational, emotion- and subconscious-driven creature. Psychoanalysis as an intellectual movement and method of treatment became increasingly influential throughout the world. However, Freud continued to demand unwavering adherence to his doctrines, and associates who expressed their own ideas soon ran afoul of him. Ultimately, his daughter Anna Freud became his most loyal and devoted disciple.[27]

Jewish Invention

Freud was in effect the scion of a traditional Hasidic Jewish environment. His invention of psychoanalysis can be viewed as originating from Jewish traditions and complexes. For example, Freud never had the courage to reveal to the world that his famous Oedipus Complex was in reality a characteristic Jewish complex. As a good Jew, Freud projected the neuroses of Judaism onto the rest of humanity, using a Greek legend to facilitate acceptance by the goyim of his “discovery.”[28]

David Bakan writes: “The basic criticism against the doctrine of the Oedipus Complex is that it is modeled along the lines of the particular type of family constellation to be found in Freud’s legacy culture. It is claimed that Freud committed the fallacy of ethnocentrism, that he overgeneralized on the basis of a particular culture.”[29] As Bakan implies, Freud’s Oedipus Complex is in reality a Jewish specificity.[30]

David Bakan also demonstrates that psychoanalysis is largely derived from the methods of the Jewish Kabbalah and the Talmud. He writes, for example, that the fundamental principles of dream interpretation used by Freud are already present in the Talmud. Freud virtually said that in psychoanalysis, he was analyzing a human being just as the Jews had analyzed the Torah for centuries.[31]

Emmanuel Ratier has stressed Freud’s membership in the Masonic sect of B’nai B’rith, a branch of Freemasonry reserved exclusively for Jews. From 1900 to 1902, Freud participated as a founder in the creation of the second Lodge of B’nai B’rith of Vienna, the Harmony Lodge.[32]

Yosef Yerushalmi writes that Freud’s psychoanalysis was a Jewish science:

History made psychoanalysis a “Jewish science.” It continued to be attacked as such. It was destroyed in Germany, Italy, and Austria and exiled to the four winds, as such. It continues even now to be perceived as such by enemies and friends alike. Of course there are by now distinguished analysts who are not Jews…But the vanguard of the movement over the last 50 years has remained predominantly Jewish, as it was from the beginning.[33]

Dr. Kevin MacDonald writes:

The obvious racialism and the clear statement of Jewish ethical, spiritual, and intellectual superiority contained in Freud’s last work, Moses and Monotheism, must be seen not as an aberration of Freud’s thinking but as central to his attitudes…I noted that prior to the rise of Nazism an important set of Jewish intellectuals had a strong racial sense of Jewish peoplehood and felt racial estrangement from gentiles; they also made statements that can only be interpreted as indicating a sense of Jewish racial superiority. The psychoanalytic movement was an important example of these tendencies. It was characterized by ideas of Jewish intellectual superiority, racial consciousness, national pride, and Jewish solidarity.[34]

Conclusion

Sigmund Freud was a scientific fraud. American attorney and political commentator Ben Shapiro writes:

The first serious advocate of the position that human beings were no longer rational, free actors came from Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). Freud was a charlatan, a phenomenal publicist but a devastatingly terrible practicing psychologist. He was a quack who routinely prescribed measures damaging to patients, then wrote fictional papers bragging about his phenomenal results. In one 1896 lecture, he claimed that by uncovering childhood sexual trauma he had healed some 18 patients; he later admitted he hadn’t cured anyone. Freud himself stated, “I am actually not at all a man of science, not an observer, not an experimenter, not a thinker. I am by temperament nothing but a conquistador—an adventurer, if you want it translated—with all the curiosity, daring and tenacity characteristic of a man of this sort.”[35]

Dr. David Duke writes that a major portion of a Philosophy 101 course he took at Louisiana State University centered on Sigmund Freud. Duke aptly states: “I liked to call him Sigmund Fraud.”[36]

Notes

[1] http://www.adherents.com/people/100_scientists.html.
[2] Thornton, E. M., The Freudian Fallacy: An Alternative View of Freudian Theory, Garden City, N.Y.: The Dial Press, 1984, p. ix.
[3] Noland, Richard W., Sigmund Freud Revisited, New York: Twayne Publishers, 1999, pp. 1-2.
[4] Ibid., pp. 2-4.
[5] Breger, Louis, Freud: Darkness in the Midst of Vision, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000, p. 30.
[6] Ibid., pp. 2-3.
[7] Crews, Frederick, Freud: The Making of an Illusion, New York: Metropolitan Books, 2017, p. 235.
[8] Breger, Louis, Freud: Darkness in the Midst of Vision, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000, p. 1.
[9] Ibid., pp. 62-64.
[10] Ibid., p. 86.
[11] Crews, Frederick, Freud: The Making of an Illusion, New York: Metropolitan Books, 2017, pp. 242, 248-249.
[12] Ibid., pp. 248-249.
[13] Ibid., p. 249.
[14] Ibid., p. 251.
[15] Ibid., pp. 251-252.
[16] Noland, Richard W., Sigmund Freud Revisited, New York: Twayne Publishers, 1999, p. 39.
[17] Ibid., pp. 50-54.
[18] Ibid., pp. 58, 70-71.
[19] Crews, Frederick, Freud: The Making of an Illusion, New York: Metropolitan Books, 2017, p. 452.
[20] Ibid., p. 451.
[21] Breger, Louis, Freud: Darkness in the Midst of Vision, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000, pp. 173-174.
[22] Ibid., p. 175.
[23] Bakan, David, Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition, New York: Schocken Books, 1965, p. 122.
[24] Breger, Louis, Freud: Darkness in the Midst of Vision, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000, pp. 179, 193.
[25] Ibid., pp. 194, 203-204.
[26] Ibid., pp. 208, 217, 230.
[27] Ibid., pp. 269, 288, 299.
[28] Ryssen, Herve, Psychoanalysis of Judaism, White Plains, Md.: The Barnes Review, 2019, p. 389.
[29] Bakan, David, Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition, New York: Schocken Books, 1965, p. 275.
[30] Ryssen, Herve, Psychoanalysis of Judaism, White Plains, Md.: The Barnes Review, 2019, p. 390.
[31] Bakan, David, Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition, New York: Schocken Books, 1965, pp. 251, 258.
[32] Ryssen, Herve, Psychoanalysis of Judaism, White Plains, Md.: The Barnes Review, 2019, p. 392.
[33] Yerushalmi, Yosef Hayim, Freud’s Moses: Judaism Terminable and Interminable, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1991, p. 98.
[34] MacDonald, Kevin, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, Long Beach, Cal.: 2002, pp. 108-109.
[35] Shapiro, Ben, The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great, New York: Broadside Books, 2019, p. 166.
[36] Duke, David, My Awakening: A Path to Racial Understanding, Mandeville, La.: Free Speech Press, 1999, p. 494.

Source

52 thoughts to “Sigmund Freud: Scientific Trailblazer or Huckster?”

    1. He was full of it, and full of himself, and made millions of people unhappy and neurotic, but psychiatrists made plenty of money in the process.

  1. “ambiguous science” – a contradiction in terms.

    Science = (1) corroborated observation, (2) a quantitative theory and (3) prediction.

    It is perfectly possible to investigate the mind scientifically but Freud fails on all 3 counts.

    Psychoanalysis is no different to spiritualism, shamanism or any number of schemes to con ones fellow man..

    1. Flan
      I agree that when you attach the “ism” to “shaman” it produces a form of con game, as with all “ism”* attachments. But this shouldn’t negate what legitimate shamans see.

      *The fake shamans “spin the con”…..e.g.; the Chabadians with their “end-times” bullcrap

  2. If you want a TRUE “Doctor Of The Soul” then you’d best get acquainted with (one time Freud friend) Carl Jung…

    but, then again, maybe not…
    since, if you “investigate” your soul too much ( as Jung did) and dig too deep, you’ll be confronted with ogres – which will make your worst nightmare seem like a Bugs Bunny cartoon – and “rites of passage” along the way…
    which might have the unfortunate effect of pulling you into “The Abyss “…. yes, Virginia, that would be the same “Abyss” that Nietzsche spoke of… and which, ultimately, drove him insane.

    So, for all you dilettantes posting here, I respectfully suggest you stick to that fake phoney fraud Freud… who, at least, you’ll find more “accommodating” of your own prurient peccadilloes.

    As always, you’re welcome. Have a nice day.

    1. @ The Realist

      A perfectly acceptable comment until the penultimate paragraph:

      So, for all you dilettantes posting here, I respectfully suggest you stick to that fake phoney fraud Freud… who, at least, you’ll find more “accommodating” of your own prurient peccadilloes.

      You couldn’t resist that nasty parting shot, could you? “Prurient peccadilloes”, eh? This man has had an “education” … and likes to advertise it! Forsooth, he can spell and use polysyllabic words to underline his infinite superiority to all the other lesser mortals posting on this site!

      Your supercilious sneer does not add to your repertoire of dubious charms, Mr Realist.

      You are more akin to the Freud than to Jung. An unpleasant little intellectual upstart who deserves a damn good thrashing. Don’t ever come near me in a dark alley, sir. I will do more than tweak your nose and spit in your eye. I will eviscerate you with the little ice pick I carry in my bag at all times for my protection.

      1. Dearest “Madame”,

        unfortunately, not being a “client” of “Ladies Of The Night”, I don’t frequent “dark alleyways” so it’ll have to be another venue for you to demonstrate your “pick” skills.

        How does The Plaza, Central Park South sound? Maybe you could get to work on the ice-bucket and do a little frappe’ing while I’m perusing the list of Barons de Rothschild champagne on offer? Oh yes, easy on the make-up… and please don’t dress like a tart… or you’ll be promptly escorted out the back door… assuming I haven’t already dismissed you out of hand.

  3. Syamasundara dasa: Freud believed that painful or traumatic experiences, often repressed by forgetfulness, lie deep in our subconscious. By recalling them, we may be able to overcome the neuroses that they inflict.

    Srila Prabhupada: Our process is different. When you give a man a better thing, he will forget inferior things.

    Siggy’s transcendental trial by Shastra.

  4. It is typical of psychiatrists and psychologists to create “problems” where there aren’t any. In this, Freud has been a trend-setter. Having had to take a jungian psychology course for a distribution requirement in college, I felt the aimless directions of this “pseudo science”, and felt sorry for the poor souls who chose to pursue it for a major study (one of those bullshit collegiate experiences).

    1. I’m glad to see you think yourself a cut above Jung.
      What do you have to show for it except mud on your boots? 🙂

      1. Mjolnir,

        With a name like you ain’t goin’ far!

        Your reference to rampant rabbits show me the level of consciousness you have so far managed to achieve. Not very impressive. Hardly fit company for Plato and Socrates. 🙂

      2. But now that you have me thinking, I must say that I consider myself fairly “simple minded”, in that I take most encounters at face value. I don’t try to fathom what makes certain people the way they are, except for how it affects me. I try to simply avoid distasteful and useless people, anyway; and simply don’t care. People such as the faggots I have known are tasteful and interesting, and I have enjoyed their company without trying to figure their psyche. I DO understand lesbians, though – simply for the probability of being one, myself, had I been born a pretty woman. (Who’d want some old hairy man pawing at you to skewer you with his dick???!)
        Constantly second-guessing and analyzing people and their behavior is a futile endeavor.
        First impressions are usually most accurate and useable.

      3. Gilbert,

        Please don’t mind me if I occasionally direct a poisoned barb at you. It’s for your own good. Your reply above impressed me. You are a straight man and your sincerity comes across. One thing you are NOT, and that is a sanctimonious hypocrite. You shoot straight from the hip. You’re a regular guy.

        Anyway, good luck with your poetry. You need to write more. I think you have had 2-3 traumatic experiences in your life and they have left an indelible mark on you. You are still finding your way, not quite sure which path in the labyrinth to take.

        I apologize for any offense given.

    2. Yes, Gil.
      My father-in-law, Joe, was born in Sicily and grew up in the coal mines in Alabama. He lived with us for 10 years until he passed at home at age 96. He went to the doctor only when he had a prostate problem at age 92. I asked him a few years before that if he wanted to go get a general health check-up from a doctor. He abruptly and fiercely said….. “HELL NO! I don’t go to the goddamn doctors! They’ll just find sumthin’ wrong with ya and keep ya comin’ BACK…. jus like they do with my ole lady(wife)!”

      Joe had the normal meat & potatoes and pasta diet. He never drank alcohol or water, nor saw a ham sandwich and Coke he could pass up. 🙂

  5. An Australian university includes this question in the math section of its format: If a bat and ball cost $1.10 and the bat costs $1 more than the ball, then how much does the ball cost? 93% of Jews got the answer correct, whereas only 57% of white Goyim got the answer correct? What does this show about Jews? ….. Incidentally only 9% of negroes got the answer correct and 3% of kanuks got the correct answer. Those who provide an incorrect answer have an IQ below 105 and unlike me, failed the Mensa test.

    1. B = ball’s price
      T = bat’s price

      A bat and a ball cost $1.10
      B + T = 1.10

      The bat costs $1 more than the ball
      T = B + 1

      Now we have an elementary solvable system of two equation and two variables (I hope I’m being didactic here). Substituting T on the first equation we have:
      B + (B+1) = 1.10 = B + B + 1 = 2.B + 1
      2.B + 1 = 1.10
      2.B = 1.10 -1 = 0.10
      B = 0.10 / 2 = 0.05 (five cents)

      Now we can substitute B for its numerical value in any of those two equations. The result of T must be identical for both equations, otherwise we did something wrong in the process. I’ll take the second equation:
      T = B + 1 = 0.05 + 1
      T = 1.05 (one dollar and five cents)

      I’m afraid some Darkmooners can’t solve this problem, not because they are unintelligent, but because they lack math skills, a language they don’t “speak.” Now I ask: this test, as the IQ test, measures intelligence or math skills?

      Some people can’t read big numbers or decimals. I have had a personal experience with an Italian doctor (female) that made the mistake of evaluating the number 1.10 as if it was bigger than 1.9!

      1. Why complicate it?? Such ponderings should be instantaneous and obvious. Only be concerned with yourself if it causes great pause…
        To be overly concerned with how others perceive you indicates insecurity – and that causes undue stress. Any interesting life REQUIRES mental challenges, anyway, and if they become too difficult, find another pursuit. Commenting on this site, for instance, elicits requisite of thought WITHOUT the stress of anticipating damaging consequences for disagreements. It is relaxing, as it should be. If I say something stupid, I have no doubt I’ll be called on it by more intelligent readers. It is often a learning experience! 😉

      2. NBTT,

        Thanks for the brilliant equations.
        But you didn’t answer the question.
        How much does the ball cost?

      3. Am I complicating, Gilbert? I just couldn’t resist the piece-of-cake math charade.

        “Constantly second-guessing and analyzing people and their behavior is a futile endeavor.”

        I won’t answer your “futile endeavor.” I could talk a lot about me but what is the point of doing that? This is not a chat room. Am I a stressed person? Definitely! And I don’t drink, poor me, I can’t relax…

        You missed my point completely, instead of trying to answer my question on the IQ test or maybe some thoughts on language you tried to lecture me how to live life. Thanks, nice try. You can’t lecture me on that simply because my life mission is not the same as yours.

        “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world” – Ludwig Wittgenstein

      4. DWS,

        Are you being sarcastic? Those equations are far from brilliant.
        I know what you want, it’s a clear conclusion, first thing readers look on scientific documents.

        Conclusion:
        The ball costs five cents.

      5. No, I wasn’t being sarcastic.
        Equations without a conclusion are downright silly.
        If you ask a question, answer it!
        Don’t dance around with fancy equations. 🙂

      6. Actually I was deeply impressed by your mathematical expertise . . . but was nevertheless “threatened” by my own woeful ignorance of the subject. 🙂

      7. Thank you, DWS. And I have been deeply impressed by the linguistic and poetic skills of you guys and gals. 🙂

    2. Never mind what it costs,I can get it wholesale.
      Remember GOD created goyim because someone has to pay retail……

    1. Bark –
      “..how Freudian is Scientology,,”

      Not much in my research years ago at the ‘Mother Ship’ in Clearwater FL; not in the beginning, except for overlapping coincidences when studying human relationships.
      Ron Hubbard was in competition for $$$ with the Freudian disciples.

      Hubbard’s 3 stated long-range goals for Scientology:
      1-Eliminate pain.
      2-Eliminate war.
      3-Eliminate ALL psychs & the fields of psychology & psychiatry.

      As I see it today, Scientology is run by criminal jews.

      1. Pat, hard as it is to believe, you might be wrong on this one. For all its bizarre and unhealthy paranoia about its own members, Scientology has accomplished one task of value to everyone. Its adherents have analyzed the Jewish practice of psychology and in particular psychoanalysis down to the molecular level and revealed it all to be a complex method of controlling the population and enslaving the people under its spell. Certainly this is a valuable contribution to the human body of knowledge, even if Scientologists use these same odious practices on their own co-religionists.

        So at least initially, this is why I would suspect Scientology is not a Jewish operation, even though all religions of the world — by hook or by crook — seem to resemble a Jewish operation (money being more important to them than propagation of their unique divine details).

        But then reconsidering, we are beginning to better understand that Jews generally control both sides of every argument, so it would be typical for them to set up a critique of psychology to forestall any other more objective investigators to mount a similar but more incisive analysis of the manipulative aspects of psychology.

        John Wear is a writer of uncommon clarity, as he proved in his opus “Germany’s War.” His description of psychology in the Scientology piece above . . .

        Freud was in effect the scion of a traditional Hasidic Jewish environment. His invention of psychoanalysis can be viewed as originating from Jewish traditions and complexes. For example, Freud never had the courage to reveal to the world that his famous Oedipus Complex was in reality a characteristic Jewish complex. As a good Jew, Freud projected the neuroses of Judaism onto the rest of humanity, using a Greek legend to facilitate acceptance by the goyim of his “discovery.”

        . . . reinforces the important notion that all non Jews should realize that the entire framework of psychology which was mainly constructed by Freud has from the start been a Jewish program to sabotage and vandalize the consciousness of everyone for purposes of control. You could note that this manipulative campaign stretches all the way back to the creation of Christianity by Jews in the early Roman empire, but in fact it extends even further back in history than that.

      2. John, thanks for the reply. You are correct about the war on psychs.
        Hubbard was very serious about what I listed in my comment above:
        “3-Eliminate ALL psychs & the fields of psychology & psychiatry.”
        But Hubbard is gone now.
        There are jews everywhere in the ‘church’ today…. big money sources.
        Psychs are their competition, and they want them gone for monetary reasons today.

        This may be of interest to you:
        “Musician, singer, songwriter, and record producer, Beck Hansen, has self-identified as both Jewish and Scientologist.(!!) 🙂 He was raised Scientologist and is married to Marissa Ribisi, a second-generation Scientologist. Although he isn’t very vocal about his participation in the religion, he and his wife were listed as Patrons in 2006 in Impact 114, the official magazine of the International Association of Scientologists.”

        See more jews:
        —Celebrities You Didn’t Know Were Scientologists—
        https://bestlifeonline.com/celebrity-scientologists/

  6. Madame B.
    You go girl! Put this little twerp in his place. I got yer “prurient piccadilly” right here, pal!

    But that aside, the “ogres” that “The Realist” alludes to, the ones that drove Nietzsche mad, were the same ones of whom Don Juan (he of Castaneda fame) was well acquainted with. The difference between them being that the latter maintained his sanity when confronted by them.
    His “secret”? Essentially, he recognized their illusory nature and was able to deal with them accordingly.
    Phantasmagorical “soap bubbles” is all they are…….👹POP!🌬

    1. Speaking of Nietzsche, it’s said that the straw that broke his sanity occurred when he saw a HUMAN ogre whipping his horse. He couldn’t take being a witness to man’s inhumane treatment any more. He obviously had compassion for the poor animal being beaten, which is in his favor by emulating Christ. But that he went insane shows a certain weakness. Had he taken what he witnessed a step farther in demonstrating Christ-like behavior he would have confronted the ogre and severely admonished him with the kind of fierceness that would have turned the man into a whimpering puddle of goo.

      This is the Jesus I know

  7. I’m not even going to read this. Freud was a mix of Hollywood and Marketing. A referent for the semi-educated from places like Harvard and Big Ten Schools to bring up in conversation to sound knowing and display the problem solving skills they managed to pick up as members of the elite. LOL.

    He managed to tap into something and find a useful key that we know his nephew Bernays used this knowledge on what made people tick to great success in gaining brand loyalty, but even more actually changing behaviors.

    Most famously his Torches For Freedom Campaign held on Easter Sunday parade or Mother’s Day, something like that, where he got thousands of formerly proper housewives to parade around like hussies with lit cigarettes. Next thing you know Mama is walking down the street with a cigarette in one hand and a martini in the other. That’s class, Baby!

    As far as the science goes who knows? Probably just working on a level that they don’t really understand, but they do know it works if you find the right recipe. But it is absolutely useless as a tool for treating the ill-adjusted.

    The fact that people freely use the word ‘anal’ to describe a person who is together and well organized in his physical proximity as well as mental constructs has been a disaster for mankind. I really think it is a reason that so many perverts find anal so interesting in porno videos.

    That he is praised to this day in movies and other media is as nauseating as having to listen to how great Einstein was or Alan Greenspan for that matter.

    1. I’m not even going to read this.

      Why not? This an exceptionally good exposé of Freud and his erroneous ideas. If you think Freud is a “fake”, this is exactly the article your SHOULD read!

  8. The first time I read a very critical report on Freund was one by the late Hans Jürgen Eysenck, a man I still cannot fathom to date. He left Germany, but he wrote like a German about race and intelligence.

    https://hanseysenck.com/

    1. @ ex South African

      Eysenck was a highly respected psychologist (German American) who was one of the first to shock the complacency out of the Freudians. At a time when everyone was still raving about Freud, Eysenck’s short book created quite a stir by its sensational title alone: “THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE FREUDIAN EMPIRE”.

      1. However, Eyesenck’s book is tame in comparison to the more recent books on Freud by Frederick Crews. A real Freud expert. These books tear Freud apart completely and read like gripping novels. Freud emerges as a total fake with a monstrous ego: a writer of brilliant literary prose but a con man all the same. Cocaine addict too, compulsive cigar smoker, virulent atheist, and narcissist who could never admit he was wrong about anything. Disagree with him even once about anything, as Jung did, and you became his enemy for life.

      2. How many men have you met who lust after their mothers? (OEDIPUS COMPLEX). I haven’t met any myself. How many women have you met who spend their time longing to have penises instead of vaginas? (PENIS ENVY). I can’t say I’ve met any. 🙂

  9. I didn’t read the article either…
    It’s all supposed to be going on sub-consciously, oedipus complex, penis envy, whatever, which means it’s all theoretical, can’t be proven, not scientific… It does seem brilliantly insightful, though shockingly distasteful to many, that man’s reproductive drive, which we now hear seats in the R-Complex, the Reptile Brain, is basically what’s driving everything he does, especially during childhood and from infancy, less so after puberty when his sexuality is realized… No doubt so-called psychoanalysis has some sort of beneficial affect on some people, who really just need someone to talk to, but you might get the same from a decent bartender…
    However, there’s no doubt there is a collective unconscious psych, clairvoyant cumulus connection, whatever… I don’t have a problem believing that, I’ve seen it in action… And the hundredth monkey phenomenon can’t be denied…
    I would say though, it’s probably a pretty long way from knowing that much basically to a place where individuals can actually be cured of their quirks and idiosyncracies, addictions and impulsive behaviors, by talking to some expert, with plenty of hokum along the way… And anybody who’s as hooked as Freud was hardly seems an example…
    PAT
    I was able to get part-way through the Scientology Bible, got the gist of it…
    Basically as the working hypothesis goes, people are all reliving bad experiences in their subconscious/unconscious minds, by way of rotten little messages they get from themselves without knowing it, called anagrams, that are throwing off their attitudes, causing them to fail repeatedly at whatever it is they’d like to accomplish…
    Wasn’t Hubbard a Lieutenant Commander?

    1. @ Barkingdeer

      I didn’t read the article either…

      You never do. This is obvious from all your comments.If you tried reading the articles, your comments might actually be worth reading.

      1. Barkingdeer is always worth reading, but you need
        a compass to the intricate landscape of his mind,
        which is not like the pedestrian minds of other people.

      2. The same applies to “The Realist” —
        The brilliant Curmudgeon from Krackostan! 🙂

  10. Siegmund Freud, a member of the Bnai Brith, played a key role in mankind’s induction into the Cabala sex cult. Freud was a precursor of Alfred Kinsey, the pervert who killed himself trying to masturbate. Kinsey filled his famous Rockefeller-sponsored report with the behavior patterns of his fellow homosexuals. Thus, he convinced Americans that promiscuity and deviance were the norm.Siegmund Freud should be called Sick Mind Fraud .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *