Question regarding Freudian Theory on Psycho sexual development?
1) Were these theories intended by Freud to be taken LITERALLY?
2) If you believe they were not in a literal sense, then WHAT sense were they? Please no silly comments, I would really like to gain an understanding of what he really ment to convey. Any insight, or elaborations will be greatly appreciated, thanks!
Answer:
Freud was addicted to cocain during the time he was coming up with his theories. He was so much in denial about the truth of his client's claims of father-daughter incest that he came up with the idea that girls fantasized about wanting their fathers - the whoe oedipus complex stuff. Rationalizing! Denail and rationalizing - he called them "defence mechanisms" but he would have even more denials!
The main thing to remember He was High! (and NUTS!!)
Freud was too bored to get a real job, so he sat around thinking about himself on the couch...
How could it be anything but a methaphor? After all Oedipus did not want to kill his father, or sleep with his mother, either.
in some cases it can be literal; however, for most people its not. his theory is that developing men tend to be attracted to women who posses traits similar to their mothers and tend to have a fear of their fathers also keep in mind Freud was a nut job and i personally believe that he made his statements so outrageous just for the notoriety
The Oedipus complex is a concept within psychoanalytic theory referring to a stage of psychosexual development where a child of either gender regards the parent of the same gender as an adversary, and competitor, for the exclusive love of the parent of the opposite gender. The name derives from the Greek myth of Oedipus, who unwittingly kills his father, Laius, and marries his mother, Jocasta.
What I learned is that it pretty much means for us that growing up, you are more attached to the opposite sex parent, and you desire to have someone like them.
With Freud, it was all about conflict.
The idea is that deep down, you have the conflict of wanting to displace your father in your mother's life.
The conflict is what causes sublimation. Sublimation causes neurosis. Once you know what is going on, the conflict is supposed to just "poof" away in a cloud of catharsis.
There is a reason no one uses this method anymore.
Joe
I think that Freud actually meant these literally...as shocking as that may sound to you and me. Freud was born and raised in the Victorian era...a period of history and time when sex and sexuality were repressed, and expressions of such were often frowned upon or punished. He believed that many (if not all) mental disorders arose from this repression...so his psychological theories reflect this thinking. I, personally, think he was a little "off track" if he meant those theories in a literal way...but he may not be off track in idea that sexual repression can cause mental problems. It's just hard for us to take literally his theories, esp. today in the much-freer society we live in. However, his theories caused some pretty major controversy back then, as well.
They are literal. Freud's stages are based on his observations and conclusions he arrived at during his many years of practice. Agree with him or not, they still were meant to be taken literally.
You will need to read up, here are some links; I hope this helps: http://www.freudfile.org/resources.html...
I am not an expert, but I do have a degree in psychology and have studied this extensively.
I believe that Freud's psychosexual stages all have a basis in fact. I think he set up an "outline" of sexual development. The detail and explanations he gives are probably his "best guess." Remember that psychology was in its infancy at that time. He saw so many patients that he probably had exposure to people who fit strictly within his definitions and criteria, further justifying his beliefs in his views. I believe that he probably figured that everyone else could be "typed," in a rough or loose way, according to this outline. To imply that everyone has to go through these stages or get stuck is, in my opinion, egotistical on his part. Just because he was the be all and end all of his time and the father of psychology doesn't mean he was perfect or even anywhere in the ball park. (I reference the id, ego, and superego.) Oedipus and c. anxiety were probably themes he saw, to some degree or another, part of the desires and fears of his patients.
But how will we ever really know? I don't believe that any of these ideas can be "proven" in time or with further research. If we use history as a guide, his ideas could be viewed as part of the foundation of the science, which seems like a much more plausible idea than taking them in the literal sense.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: