Let us understand one thing that brings more openness to our style of thinking and less righteous intolerance in our attitude in terms of getting stuck inside unnecessary 'either/or' combative arguments.
...........................................................................................................
Seek first to understand, then to be understood. -- Stephen Covey
...........................................................................................................
Theories -- even good theories are always wrong some of the time! You want your theories to be as 'right' as possible...but still, no theory can capture 'all of the rightness of reality'....and all theories will go down trying and dying while they are trying...
It cannot be any different.
Because if a theory was always right -- meaning in every context, every situation, with every case example -- we would not call it a 'theory'; rather, we would call it a 'fact' or we would call it 'the truth' or as some theorists-philosophers-psychologists or religious and/or political zealots are prone to do, we would call it 'The Truth'....or even Hegel used the term -- 'The Absolute'...
Actually, if any one philosopher has or had the right to call his or her philosophy the philosophy of a 'human dialectic evolution towards The Absolute' -- it was Hegel.
Different than most philosophers before him, Hegel saw that human evolution -- indeed, all of life evolution -- depended on 'extremist, one-sided, polar philosophies dialectically engaging with, and playing off against, each other in an engagement that voluntarily or forcefully moved both parties toward the middle...towards a more 'homeostatic-dialectic-(democratic) balance' that was more 'mutually satisfying' and 'dialectically stabilizing' for both parties than either 'extremist philosophy' by itself.
...................................................................................................... The Master and The Slave Relationship
The master and the slave both need each other. They are both dependent on each other. They both have 'gaps' in their respective evolutionary development, and this gap is exactly 'the strength' of the evolutionary development of the bi-polar other. The master knows how to direct the slave and to give him or her instructions -- in more or less coercive fashion; in contrast, the 'slave' knows how to do what the master probably doesn't know how to do himself or herself (unless 'the master' has done 'the chore' that 'the slave' knows how to do in the absence of -- or beside -- 'the slave'. Both 'master' and 'slave' need each other, need to 'dialectically engage' with each other in a more mutually 'humanistic-existential' fashion, and in this regard, to meet more in the middle, in order to 'complete' their own particular 'wholistic evolution'. (My own interpretation of Hegel's 'Master-Slave' Theory.)
..............................................................................................
Hegel was certainly not the first 'dialectic philosopher' that believed in such a philosophy -- indeed, far from it. That honour would have to go back to the ancient Greek philosopher, Anaximander, or the ancient Chinese philosopher, Lao Tse....or some very, very ancient Chinese philosopher before Lao Tse, and/or perhaps a very, very old Middle Eastern philosopher, and/or an equally very, very old East Indian philsopher, and/or a very, very old Native North American Indian philosopher....none of whom I have historically followed backwards in time past about 600 BC...I don't think written records go back much further than that...
However, Hegel, in clearer words than any philosopher before him, announced such things as 'Every philosophy or theory is inherently self-contradictory, and will eventually 'explode and self-destruct' in this inherent self-contradiction....'Every theory carries the seeds of its own self-destruction'...
That's quite an interesting philosophy. What it means -- essentially -- is that every philosophy, every theory, every characteristic contain both a 'life instinct' and a 'death instinct' in it at the same time. Sounds very Freudian -- very -- 'Beyond The Pleasure Principle'.
Stated differently, every one-sided theory is like a 'ticking time bomb' -- 'it has a finite lifespan' -- and it is just a matter of time before the theory 'explodes' outwardly or 'implodes' inwardly -- and 'self-destructs'. Except perhaps, the theory of 'Multi-Dialectic-Evolution' which takes into account the idea of opposing polar entities -- both 'phenomenally real' (like cat and mouse) and 'ideologically conceputalized' (like the 'pleasure' and 'reality' principle or 'the life instinct' and 'death instinct' -- doing exactly what they generally do: expoding outwards, and/or imploding inwards towards self-destruction.
Taken a little further, we might propose the dialectic paradoxical theory of Hegelian descent that: 'Every life entity carries within it the seeds of its own self-destruction'.
Indeed, maybe I have come up with a theory here that defies the inherent limitations that we just put on any and all theory/ies -- specifically, perhaps this is a theory that is always right! A theory of 'The Absolute Truth' -- 'Absolute-Dialectic-Multi-Integration Theory-Is-Terrific!' (ADMIT-IT!)
I know -- me and my acronyms -- I'm creatively offside! Overboard! Get the life rafts! Man overboard!
Certainly, this could have provided Freud in 1920 with his strongest argument in defense of his very controversial 'Death (Self-Destruction) Instinct and Entropy' (DIE) Theory. I'm sick. My acronym again. I must have death on my mind... 56 and thinking about death...Freud was 64 in 1920 and thinking about death. Three more years from 1920 -- i.e., 1923 -- and Freud would be diagnosed with cancer (of the jaw?), but amazingly, he held on until 1939...that would be 83 years old. Nietzsche died at my age right now -- 56. That's scary -- I feel closer to Nietzsche than to Freud...I will shoot for 60 and everything after that is a 'bonus'...
We breathe in 'oxygen'. Oxygen is a 'living entity'. Oxygen is one of the driving forces of life. However, it is also one of the driving forces of death. Something 'oxidizes', 'ages' (rusts, gets wrinkles, loses its 'functional efficiency'...) -- and eventually it dies or we die from the destructive force of oxidizing oxgen
as it paradoxically 'combusts' in the body in order to give us 'the driving force of life'.
In other words -- 'oxygen' contains both a 'life and a death instinct' in terms of its relevance to the existence -- and the non-existence -- of man. Again, this sounds very 'Freudian' -- very 'Beyond The Pleasure Principle'.
Freud always had some 'conceptul gems' -- even in some of his most outrageous essays -- when you read him and thought/think that he was most 'off his rocker'. You could/can still learn something from him.
'All life is paradoxical.' (There is another 'Absolute' theory.) -- a paradox built on the foundation of man's (and life's) essential 'bi-polar nature and essence' , indeed, man's 'multi-bi-polar' nature and essence.
If you get diagnosed with BPD -- 'Bi-Polar Disorder' -- relax. Ask your psychiatrist -- 'which one? Tell him or her that you have a 'thousand bi-polar disorders'. Could he or she be more specific?
Indeed, we all have a thousand bi-polar disorders -- at one time and/or another...
Nobody is perfectly balanced -- not even your psychiatrist!
In fact, unbeknownst to you, he or she may be more unbalanced than you?
Swith seats, switch roles -- and feel the surge of 'power' within you...
Is it all relative? Or is it 'legalized relativity and power'?
Any time we say to ourselves, 'Turn left'...there is something that will begin to 'formulate' in another part of our brain -- could be in either our 'Righteous Superego' or our 'Rebellious Underego' or even, way down in our 'Shadow-Id-Drive (SID) Chamber' -- that says, 'Why didn't you turn right?'
Why is it that 'ethics' destroys our sexual fantasies?
Because 'sexual desire and fantasy gets off on the 'ethically forbidden'.
Why does your daughter always bring home the boy or man that (she knows -- or at least subconsciously knows) you least want to see her with? Romantically and sexually her 'aphrodisiac' is consciously and/or subconsciously 'defying your parental authority'. Our Creator -- 'God and/or Nature' -- has a 'sneaky, sadistic streak in him and/or her. He/She/It/They know that the best way to guarantee 'biological, cultural, and conceptual diversity' -- is for the child-teenager-adult to 'get sexually turned on' by 'defying the parents' righteous authority rules'...regardless of whether these rules are overtly stated or covertly percolating...and then boiling... Your children can see through your illusions and manipulations and hypocrisies... They are very smart...and eventually learn their own 'transference games people play'...
So, even as there is a driving life force, a driving theory, a driving philosophy, a driving impulse...that is 'exploding' -- or at least 'wants' to explode -- into 'behavioral action', at the same time, there is always a 'second-guessing counter-force', conscious or subconscious, that is wanting either to 'restrain the first force' and/or 'explode in a different direction'....This is an essential derrivative of 'the multi-bi-polar nature and essence of man'...the drive always eventually towards 'homeostatic-dialectic-bi-polar- balance-unity-and-harmony -- even as we say, 'Forget that...who wants boring balance...I'm off to explore the 'excitement' of a polar extreme...' This is still part of the dialectic-bi-polar-integrative process... You will be back!...You may have fun for a while playing the extreme...until you almost kill yourself or get sick of your own self-destructionism -- like that little molecule of 'oxygen' that contains both life and death processes...and then like a pendulum swinging...you will be back...perhaps overcompensating...and swinging outwards to the opposite extreme...and then eventually back towards the centre again...
There is no disorder that I can think of that doesn't either consists of some type of 'deficiency' and/or 'avoidance' in man, or conversely, an 'excessive, toxic surplus' of something...'Too much'...or 'too little'...these are the essential 'diseases' and/or 'disorders' of life...
Life is about making 'Either/Or' (E/O) choices...
And, at the same time, or at different times, life is about making 'Multi-Integrative-Dialectic (MID) choices....which is a fancy way of saying that life is about make 'Compromise-Choices' (CCs)...that ideally appeal to both sides in a 'Dialectic-Control-Battle' (DCB)...between 'for' and 'against'...'pro' and 'con'...'good' and 'bad'...they can all be turned around, and turned upside down....to give us the opposite perspective...
Freud was a DIE-HARD. Here we go again with my acronyms...I can't help it....They just keep coming....A 'DIE-HARD' is a 'Dialectically-Incomplete-Extremist-Hot-And-Righteously-Driven'...
So was Masson in the 1980s.....He's tamed down a little now....Over ten years of righteously defending an upopular Establishment position will tame most people down over time...as entropy -- and the wish for peace and harmony -- takes more importance in your life...But of course, this is me speculating....Masson is still fighting ethical battles on the vegetarian (as in 'no meat') front... 'The Face on The Plate in Front of You'...
Freud lost some of his 'courage' -- as Masson put it on May 4th, 1896... 115 years ago today if my math is right...That was the day his Traumacy-Seduction Theory Died in Submission To A Greater, More Coercive, Manipulative, Diabolical Complex of Powers....Money, Politics, Corporate Institutionalism...Cocaine, 'Nasal-Sexual Surgery'....and Medical Guilt....Freud went from one polar extreme (Traumacy-Seduction Theory) to the opposite extrem (Instinct-Fantasy Theory). He was too much of a DIE-HARD (same with Nietzsche) to ever come back to find the 'multi-integrative-dialectic balance'.
I will have to do it for him.
Freud's Traumacy-Seduction Theory was 'wrong'....meaning 'righteously and reductionistically one-sided'...which means that Masson's defense of this theory in the 1980s was also righteously and reductionistically one-sided...
If a theorist, a philosopher, a psychologist, a politican, an economist...emphasizes only one 'extremist-one-sided-bi-polar theory' in the 'full bi-polar spectrum of birth, life, creativity, evolution, de-evolution, polar tragedy, destruction/self-destruction, victim and victimizer, entropy, and death', then the theorist is necessarily going to be wrong because he or she is 'stuck in his or her theoretical box', can't see out of it, is trapped, and will essentially die inside it, because he or she cannot 'break the straight-jacket' of what the theory had done to -- and is doing to -- him and/or her...(That is one theory that I will give Fliess credit for -- his theory of 'psychological bi-sexuality' -- we are all essentially 'bi-sexual' in that we all have 'male and female DNA inside us', 'also, male and female hormones inside us in different balances', and in most cases, 'Introjected (Internalized) Male and Female Love-Hate Object-Templates' causing us ecstasy and tragedy....inside and outside of our mind-brains...
Even when I often think that Freud was at his absolute 'cognitive-emotional-behavioral' worst....such as in the midst of his 1895-1896 'cocaine and Emma Ekstein medical fiasco', he can still throw a surprising...even shockingly...'good concept' at me...and the rest of the world reading Freud...
The post-1895 Freudian concept of 'longing' that was to signify the beginning of what we now call 'Classical' Psychoanalysis -- as in a school of Psychoanalysis based primarily on the 'wishful fantasy-driven-impulses-and/or-instincts' that 'under-ride' our thinking, feeling, and behavior....is not a concept or a theory without important value...it just needs to be put in its proper place at the other 'bi-polar end' of Freud's earlier 'Traumacy-Seduction Theory'...
Anna Freud once said -- and I am paraphasing here without a proper reference at the moment (I believe it was in a private letter to Masson that can be found in the introduction to either 'Assault on Truth' or 'Final Analysis', I think the latter --- to be confirmed) -- she said essentially, Without Freud having abandoned the Traumacy-Seduction Theory, there would have been no 'Instinct' Theory which is now the foundation of Classical Psychoanalysis.
Anna Freud was wrong in this respect. The Traumacy-Seduction Theory was/is a one-side bi-polar theory of human nature, psychology, and psychopathology, that emphasizes 'the roots of our neuroses' in our childhood traumacies...the theory becomes even more 'reductionistic' if you believe, like Freud did, that the 'traumacies' had to be 'unconciously repressed' (meaning unobtainable to our normal memory processes except through professional hypnosis, suggestion, 'forehead pressing', and/or free association -- in short, 'Psychoanalysis'.
By itself either Traumacy or Seduction Theory -- and/or the two integrated together --is still a one-sided, reductionistic theory that is like the 'one-sided foundation' in the basement of a house...the house is quite likely at some point going to 'lean over' like 'The Leaning Tower of Pisa' -- and/or with any serious 'wind factor' -- probably topple over...
That was -- and still is -- The Traumacy-Seduction Theory.
The same story goes for Freud's post-1896 'Instinct' Theory...
Every theory is inherently one-sided and capable of toppling over if, and by, itself...unless or until it is 'counter-balanced' by its 'polar-opposite theory'....This is the essence of Derrida's 'Deconstruction' Philosophy which is a 20th century extension of 19th century Hegelian and Post-Hegelian Dialectic Theory....'Quantum Physics' is an example of 'Quantum-Dialectic Post-Hegelian Philosophy...it came about by 'integrating two opposing theories of energy, motion, and physics -- together into one dualistic-dialectic quantum theory'....
....................................................................................
From Wikipedia...
Quantum mechanics, also known as quantum physics or quantum theory, is a branch of physics providing a mathematical description of the dual particle-like and wave-like behaviour and interaction of matter and energy.
.......................................................
Obviously, if you think about Psychoanalytic theory in this 'Quantum-Dialectic Light', then the answer to the 'Tramacy-Seduction Theory' vs. 'Instinct-Fantasy' Theory of Psychoanalysis -- becomes integrating the two theories together.
That would lead us to 'Traumacy-Impulse-Transference' Theory...and I will leave the anacronym alone this time around...no I won't ....because, as I have said elsewhere, it either literarily and/or metaphorically partly fits...
All of us, in our 'most neurotic moments', are at least partly looking for some sort of 'Missing Tit' -- or more formally, a 'Missing Breast' -- of Nurturing, Encouraging, Support...in our times of greatest stress....
Whether we want to focus in on the more 'narcissistic, hedonistic (sensual-sexual)' part of 'infantile-childhood-adult' -- 'longing' and/or the more 'maternal-paternal-nurturing-encouraging' part of 'infantile-childhood-adult 'longing' -- there is an important place for both of these elements of later Psychoanalytic Theory...just don't leave out the 'traumacy-seduction' theoretical base as well...
Mix all of these different components of 'pre' and 'post' 1896 Psychoanalytic Theory and you are going to get a much better brand of 'Wholistic' as opposed to 'Reductionistic' Psychoanalytic Theory...
And this is what I am calling...'Multi-Integrative-Dialectic' Psychoanalytic Theory....
Enough for today...
Today is the 115th anniversary of the day that Freud first turned Psychoanalysis -- upside down.
-- dgb, April 9th, updated May 4th, 2011,
-- David Gordon Bain,
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process...
