Home Books Articles Feedback Rating
Sections
Books on economics Books on business Public finance Foreign economics History Marketing Management Political Economy Applied Economic disciplines Sociology Accounting and Audit Philosophy Finance 3 2
Recent receipts
Prikhodko A.-Banking law The Law of Ukraine On Banks and banking activities Dudkina L.
-History of the State and Law of Russia Zhulina E.-Economics and Sociology of labor History of the Russian mafia.
1995-2003 Bolshaya krysha Karyshev V. M.
History of the Russian mafia 1988-1994.
Bolshaya strelka Karyshev V. M. History of political and legal doctrines Batalina V. V. History of military courts of Russia Petukhov N. A. Melnik A. I.-History of Ukraine Lubsky V. I., Lubska M. V.-History of religion
Pay attention
personality structure gender socialization
on srinest.com
How to properly manage the finances of your business, if you are not an expert in the field of financial analysis - Financial analysis
Financial management - financial relations between financial entities, financial management at different levels, securities portfolio management, methods of managing the movement of financial resources this is not a complete list of the subject " Financial Management"
Let's talk about what is coaching?
Some believe that this is a bourgeois brand, others that it is a breakthrough in modern business.
Coaching is a set of rules for successful business management, as well as the ability to properly manage these rules
4.1.
Sigmund Freud and the concept of the unconscious To the table of contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
The concept of the unconscious, that part of the human soul that is a kind of secret for the individual, has been developing for thousands of years.
The fact of scientific ignorance of the human psyche has been used and is still being exploited by all religions.
A person is limited in his consciousness.
Something that lies outside of his thoughts, but exists in the same brain, controls the frontal personality [35].
The automatism of thinking seems to us something natural and easy to perceive, but behind this simplicity lies the true nature of the human psyche, which apparently is the true Self.
The greatest contribution to the development of the concept of the unconscious was made by Sigmund Freud [21] (hereinafter simply Freud).
For Freud, the unconscious is not something abstract, completely meaningless and elusive, which can at best act as an abstract concept used in describing certain mental processes [32].
Like many philosophers who appeal to this concept, he is ready to recognize the unconscious as a heuristic value, that is, to consider it as a theoretical construct necessary for a better understanding and explanation of the human psyche.
However, unlike those philosophers who see in the unconscious only a theoretical concept that contributes to the elimination of logical connections between conscious processes and deep structures of the psyche, Freud considers the unconscious as something really psychic, characterized by its own characteristics and having quite specific meaningful implications.
Based on this understanding, within the framework of psychoanalytic philosophy, an attempt is made to comprehend the unconscious mental by identifying its content characteristics and revealing the specifics of the course of unconscious processes.
Freud writes that the division of the psyche into conscious and unconscious is the main prerequisite of psychoanalysis.
Moreover, such a division is justified not only methodically, but also intuitively.
The practice of Freud and other psychoanalysts clearly confirms the presence of these two parts of the psyche [22].
Freud points out that psychoanalysis cannot consider the conscious as the essence of the psychic, but must consider consciousness as a quality of the psychic, which may or may not join its other qualities.
What is the conscious and the unconscious from the standpoint of Freudianism, psychoanalysis?
In his fundamental work I and IT [21], Freud notes that being conscious is primarily a purely descriptive term that relies on the most direct and reliable perception.
Experience further shows us that a psychic element, such as a representation, is usually not permanently conscious.
On the contrary, it is characteristic for him that the state of awareness passes quickly, the idea is conscious at the moment, and in the next moment it ceases to be so, but it can become conscious again under certain, easily achievable conditions.
We do not know what it was like in the intermediate period; we can say that it was latent, meaning that it was capable of becoming conscious at any moment.
If we say that it was unconscious, we will also give a correct description.
This unconscious in this case coincides with the latent or potentially conscious.
We will interpret this idea of Freud and present it for this purpose in a symbolic form.
In modern terms, a person operates with information contained in his mind.
Let's denote the information that is in consciousness as Ij.
Given that at a particular time a person is able to use only a certain portion of the information available in him, then Ij is this portion, which can be expressed as DIj .
It follows from this that DIj is the current content of consciousness, that is, at the moment tn.
If we consider the infinite time period of the appearance (awareness) of the object DIj, it turns out that there is some infinite sum of these objects DåIjn, where n is an infinite number of DIj.
Using a discrete approach, we can say that DIj is an information quantum (element) the set S, which is nothing else than DåIjn.
This presentation allows us to use the apparatus of set theory and assert that S is the total amount of human information.
And, accordingly, to allocate two subsets of S={B, U} in this set.
Where B is DIj, and U is DåIjn DIj.
Now let's move on to the language of psychology
and we define the conscious as B, and the unconscious as U
Figure 2.
The general structure of the psyche from the point of view of psychoanalysis.
It should also be added that the above arguments do not consider the qualitative side of DIj, firstly, and an infinite time period was included as a reflection of the fact of a constant influx of information into a person, secondly.
In the narrative about the origins of psychoanalytic theory, Freud focuses on the fact that the concept of the unconscious arises mainly from the doctrine of repression[11].
And he declares that there are two types of the unconscious: the latent, but capable of becoming conscious, and the repressed, which in itself cannot become conscious [21].
Further, Freud clarifies what has been said, considering, however, the proposed model of the unconscious is not sufficiently convenient.
He's writing: In the further course of psychoanalytic work, however, it turns out that these differences are also insufficient, almost unsatisfactory .
Here it is advisable to cite a significant part of the article I and IT, for the purposes of presentation.
We have created for ourselves the idea of a coherent organization of mental processes in one person and designate it as the Self of this person.
This Self is connected with awareness, it dominates the impulses to move, that is, to discharge the excitement into the external world.
This is the spiritual authority that controls all private processes, which goes to sleep at night and still directs the censorship of dreams.
From this Ego also proceeds repression, by which certain psychic impulses are subject to exclusion not only from consciousness, but also from other areas of influence and action.
This elimination by means of repression in the analysis opposes itself to the Ego, and the analysis is faced with the task of eliminating the resistance that the Ego exerts to attempts to approach the repressed.
During the analysis, we observe how the patient, if he is given certain tasks, experiences difficulties; his associations stop as soon as they should approach the repressed one.
Then we tell him that he is in the power of resistance, but he himself does not know anything about it, and even in the case when, on the basis of a feeling of displeasure, he must guess that some kind of resistance is operating in him, he still does not know how to name or indicate it.
But since the resistance undoubtedly comes from his Ego and belongs to the latter, we find ourselves in an unexpected position.
We have found something in the Ego itself that is also unconscious and manifests itself like a repressed one, that is, it has a strong effect without passing into consciousness, and for the realization of which special work is required.
However, the consequences of our understanding of the unconscious are even more significant.
Familiarity with dynamics made the first amendment, structural theory makes the second.
We come to the conclusion that the unconscious does not coincide with the repressed; it remains true that the repressed is unconscious, but not all the unconscious is repressed.
Even a part of the Self (God only knows how important a part is) can be unconscious and without any doubt is such.
And this unconscious in the Ego is not latent in the sense of the preconscious, otherwise it would not be possible to make it active without awareness and awareness itself would not present so many difficulties.
When we are thus faced with the need to recognize the third, not repressed unconscious, then we have to admit that the property of unconsciousness loses its meaning for us (My note. it is meant to understand the structure of the psyche).
It becomes a multi valued quality that does not allow broad and indisputable conclusions for which we would like to use it.
Nevertheless, one should be careful not to neglect it, since in the end the property of unconsciousness or consciousness is the only ray of light in the darkness of deep psychology [21].
(It is difficult to say what Freud really meant when he spoke about the third unconscious [32])
In the above quote, the most important points are emphasized.
Paying special attention to them, you can highlight the main thing:
1. The characteristic of the Self in the structure of the psyche is determined by the main feature of the Self in its basis unconsciously.
2. The unconscious (according to Freud) consists of at least three components.
3. The object of the Self is hidden from the contents of consciousness, at least partially.
In fact, in the I and IT, Freud develops the structural organization of the psyche.
Freud writes that all our knowledge is constantly connected with consciousness.
Even the unconscious can be recognized only by turning it into the conscious.
At the same time, he raises questions: how is this possible?
What does it mean to make something conscious?
How can this happen?
Freud outlines in a general way the way of research to answer these questions.
We already know where we should start from.
We have said that consciousness is a surface layer of the mental apparatus, that is, we have made it a function of a certain system that is spatially closer to the external world.
Spatially, however, not only in the sense of function, but this time also in the sense of anatomical dissection.
It goes without saying that all perceptions coming from outside (sensory perceptions), as well as from within, which we call sensations and feelings, are conscious.
What, however, is the situation with those internal processes that we can somewhat roughly and insufficiently call thought processes?
Do these processes taking place somewhere inside the apparatus, as movements of soul energy on the way to action, reach the surface on which consciousness arises?
Or, on the contrary, does consciousness reach them?
We notice that here lies one of the difficulties that we face if we want to seriously operate with the spatial, topical representation of the soul's life [21].
From the context of the statement, it follows that there is a certain hierarchy in the mental apparatus : according to Freud, consciousness is secondary, and the unconscious is primary.
The analysis of the works of the founder of psychoanalysis by other scientists also leads to this conclusion [22, 32].
The most important moment in understanding the Freudian view of the genesis of thinking is connected with the fact that Freud correlates the origins of thinking in the unconscious with its subsequent embodiment in consciousness.
This is a very serious remark.
In the following presentation, special attention will be paid to this aspect.
Turning to the phenomenology of the unconscious, Freud seeks to understand the mechanism of the transition of mental acts from the sphere of the unconscious to the system of consciousness, to reveal the content of unconscious processes.
We are actually talking about the cognition of the unconscious, which in a broader sense is directly related to the psychoanalytic theory of cognition as such.
The initial theoretical position underlying the psychoanalytic theory of knowledge consists in Freud's recognition that, like the physical, the mental does not necessarily have to be what it seems to us [12].
But how is it possible to know the unconscious psychic if, according to the founder of psychoanalysis, it is as unknown to us in its inner essence as the reality of the external world [13]?
For Freud, the answer to this question is not difficult, as it may seem at first glance, writes V. Leibin in [32].
And it is not that he does not understand all the difficulties that arise on the way to cognition of the unconscious.
The very limitations of psychoanalytic theory, expressed in a one sided practical orientation, is the limiting factor.
Behind all the ambiguities and omissions concerning the conceptual apparatus of psychoanalytic philosophy, there is its methodological, heuristic and content limitations, which ultimately does not allow us to understand the nature of the unconscious [32].
If the psychoanalytic theory of knowledge is limited to the identification of unconscious drives, recognizing the limit beyond which a psychoanalyst who tries to comprehend the unconscious manifestations of a person cannot go further, does this not mean that Freud actually recognized the impossibility of revealing the nature of the unconscious mental by means of psychoanalysis?
It was precisely to this conclusion that the founder of psychoanalysis was forced to come [32].
Let's summarize some results on the above material.
1. Freud deeply developed the concept of the unconscious and the conscious.
He showed the presence of their complex structure, the hierarchy of components, the features of some mental processes, that is, Freud laid the foundation for a new systematic understanding of the organization of the human psyche.
2. The applied use of psychoanalytic theory, in terms of correcting the state of neurotics, does not allow us to consider its provisions in full for building a model of the human psyche.
3. The identification of the psychic object of the Self and its representation in the conscious and unconscious, gives rise to far reaching conclusions about the architecture of the psyche.
The analysis of this position is very important for building a model of the psyche.
4. Freud presents his theory in a systematic language that is convenient to interpret using symbolic formalism and based on this, as well as using some additional psychological and neurophysiological data [13,15,33,34,36] to develop an adequate model of the psyche, express it mathematically and implement it in the form of a program algorithm.
5. In view of the impossibility of cognition of the unconscious by means of psychoanalysis, it is necessary to use other, including creating new, scientific methodological and epistemological means.
The concept of the unconscious, that part of the human soul that is a kind of secret for the individual, has been developing for thousands of years.
The fact of scientific ignorance of the human psyche has been used and is still being exploited by all religions.
A person is limited in his consciousness.
Something that lies outside of his thoughts, but exists in the same brain, controls the frontal personality [35].
The automatism of thinking seems to us something natural and easy to perceive, but behind this simplicity lies the true nature of the human psyche, which apparently is the true Self.
The greatest contribution to the development of the concept of the unconscious was made by Sigmund Freud [21] (hereinafter simply Freud).
For Freud, the unconscious is not something abstract, completely meaningless and elusive, which can at best act as an abstract concept used in describing certain mental processes [32].
Like many philosophers who appeal to this concept, he is ready to recognize the unconscious as a heuristic value, that is, to consider it as a theoretical construct necessary for a better understanding and explanation of the human psyche.
However, unlike those philosophers who see the unconscious only theoretically as a concept that contributes to the elimination of logical connections between conscious processes and the deep structures of the psyche, Freud considers the unconscious as something really psychic, characterized by its own characteristics and having quite specific meaningful implications.
Based on this understanding, within the framework of psychoanalytic philosophy, an attempt is made to comprehend the unconscious mental by identifying its content characteristics and revealing the specifics of the course of unconscious processes.
Freud writes that the division of the psyche into conscious and unconscious is the main prerequisite of psychoanalysis.
Moreover, such a division is justified not only methodically, but also intuitively.
The practice of Freud and other psychoanalysts clearly confirms the presence of these two parts of the psyche [22].
Freud points out that psychoanalysis cannot consider the conscious as the essence of the psychic, but must consider consciousness as a quality of the psychic, which may or may not join its other qualities.
What is the conscious and unconscious from the standpoint of Freudianism, psychoanalysis?
In his fundamental work I and IT [21], Freud notes that being conscious is primarily a purely descriptive term that relies on the most direct and reliable perception.
Experience further shows us that a psychic element, such as a representation, is usually not permanently conscious.
On the contrary, it is characteristic for him that the state of awareness passes quickly, the idea is conscious at the moment, and in the next moment it ceases to be so, but it can become conscious again under certain, easily achievable conditions.
We do not know what it was like in the intermediate period; we can say that it was latent, meaning that it was capable of becoming conscious at any moment.
If we say that it was unconscious, we will also give a correct description.
This unconscious in this case coincides with the latent or potentially conscious.
We interpret this idea of Freud and present it for this purpose in a symbolic form.
In modern terms, a person operates with information contained in his mind.
Let's denote the information that is in consciousness as Ij.
Given that at a particular time a person is able to use only a certain portion of the information available in him, then Ij is this portion, which can be expressed as DIj .
It follows from this that DIj is the current content of consciousness, that is, at the moment tn.
If we consider the infinite time period of the appearance (awareness) of the object DIj, it turns out that there is some infinite sum of these objects DåIjn, where n is an infinite number of DIj.
Using a discrete approach, we can say that DIj is an information quantum (element) the set S, which is nothing else than DåIjn.
This presentation allows us to use the apparatus of set theory and assert that S is the total amount of human information.
And, accordingly, to allocate two subsets of S={B, U} in this set.
Where B is DIj, and U is DåIjn DIj.
Now let's move on to the language of psychology
and we define the conscious as B, and the unconscious as U
Figure 2.
The general structure of the psyche from the point of view of psychoanalysis.
It should also be added that the above arguments do not consider the qualitative side of DIj, firstly, and an infinite time period was included as a reflection of the fact of a constant influx of information into a person, secondly.
In the narrative about the origins of psychoanalytic theory, Freud focuses on the fact that the concept of the unconscious arises mainly from the doctrine of repression[11].
And he declares that there are two types of the unconscious: the latent, but capable of becoming conscious, and the repressed, which in itself cannot become conscious [21].
Further, Freud clarifies what has been said, considering, however, the proposed model of the unconscious is not sufficiently convenient.
He's writing: In the further course of psychoanalytic work, however, it turns out that these differences are also insufficient, almost unsatisfactory .
Here it is advisable to cite a significant part of the article I and IT, for the purposes of presentation.
We have created for ourselves the idea of a coherent organization of mental processes in one person and designate it as the Self of this person.
This Self is connected with awareness, it dominates the impulses to move, that is, to discharge the excitement into the external world.
This is the spiritual authority that controls all private processes, which goes to sleep at night and still directs the censorship of dreams.
From this Ego also proceeds repression, by which certain psychic impulses are subject to exclusion not only from consciousness, but also from other areas of influence and action.
This elimination by means of repression in the analysis opposes itself to the Ego, and the analysis is faced with the task of eliminating the resistance that the Ego exerts to attempts to approach the repressed.
During the analysis, we observe how the patient, if he is given certain tasks, experiences difficulties; his associations stop as soon as they should approach the repressed one.
Then we tell him that he is in the power of resistance, but he himself does not know anything about it, and even in the case when, on the basis of a feeling of displeasure, he must guess that some kind of resistance is operating in him, he still does not know how to name or indicate it.
But since the resistance undoubtedly comes from his Ego and belongs to the latter, we find ourselves in an unexpected position.
We have found something in the Ego itself that is also unconscious and manifests itself like a repressed one, that is, it has a strong effect without passing into consciousness, and for the realization of which special work is required.
However, the consequences of our understanding of the unconscious are even more significant.
Familiarity with dynamics made the first amendment, structural theory makes the second.
We come to the conclusion that the unconscious does not coincide with the repressed; it remains true that the repressed is unconscious, but not all the unconscious is repressed.
Even a part of the Self (God only knows how important a part is) can be unconscious and without any doubt is such.
And this unconscious in the Ego is not latent in the sense of the preconscious, otherwise it would not be possible to make it active without awareness and awareness itself would not present so many difficulties.
When we are thus faced with the need to recognize the third, not repressed unconscious, then we have to admit that the property of unconsciousness loses its meaning for us (My note. it is meant to understand the structure of the psyche).
It becomes a multi valued quality that does not allow broad and indisputable conclusions for which we would like to use it.
Nevertheless, one should be careful not to neglect it, since in the end the property of unconsciousness or consciousness is the only ray of light in the darkness of deep psychology [21].
(It is difficult to say what Freud really meant when he spoke about the third unconscious [32])
In the above quote, the most important points are emphasized.
Paying special attention to them, you can highlight the main thing:
1. The characteristic of the Self in the structure of the psyche is determined by the main feature of the Self in its basis unconsciously.
2. The unconscious (according to Freud) consists of at least three components.
3. The object of the Self is hidden from the contents of consciousness, at least partially.
In fact, in the I and IT, Freud develops the structural organization of the psyche.
Freud writes that all our knowledge is constantly connected with consciousness.
Even the unconscious can be recognized only by turning it into the conscious.
At the same time, he raises questions: how is this possible?
What does it mean to make something conscious?
How can this happen?
Freud outlines in a general way the way of research to answer these questions.
We already know where we should start from.
We have said that consciousness is a surface layer of the mental apparatus, that is, we have made it a function of a certain system that is spatially closer to the external world.
Spatially, however, not only in the sense of function, but this time also in the sense of anatomical dissection.
It goes without saying that all perceptions coming from outside (sensory perceptions), as well as from within, which we call sensations and feelings, are conscious.
What, however, is the situation with those internal processes that we can somewhat roughly and insufficiently call thought processes?
Do these processes taking place somewhere inside the apparatus, as movements of soul energy on the way to action, reach the surface on which consciousness arises?
Or, on the contrary, does consciousness reach them?
We notice that here lies one of the difficulties that we face if we want to seriously operate with the spatial, topical representation of the soul's life [21].
From the context of the statement, it follows that there is a certain hierarchy in the mental apparatus : according to Freud, consciousness is secondary, and the unconscious is primary.
The analysis of the works of the founder of psychoanalysis by other scientists also leads to this conclusion [22, 32].
The most important moment in understanding the Freudian view of the genesis of thinking is connected with the fact that Freud correlates the origins of thinking in the unconscious with its subsequent embodiment in consciousness.
This is a very serious remark.
In the following presentation, special attention will be paid to this aspect.
Turning to the phenomenology of the unconscious, Freud seeks to understand mecha the mechanism of the transition of mental acts from the sphere of the unconscious to the system of consciousness, to reveal the content of unconscious processes.
We are actually talking about the cognition of the unconscious, which in a broader sense is directly related to the psychoanalytic theory of cognition as such.
The initial theoretical position underlying the psychoanalytic theory of knowledge consists in Freud's recognition that, like the physical, the mental does not necessarily have to be what it seems to us [12].
But how is it possible to know the unconscious psychic if, according to the founder of psychoanalysis, it is as unknown to us in its inner essence as the reality of the external world [13]?
For Freud, the answer to this question is not difficult, as it may seem at first glance, writes V. Leibin in [32].
And it is not that he does not understand all the difficulties that arise on the way to cognition of the unconscious.
The very limitations of psychoanalytic theory, expressed in a one sided practical orientation, is the limiting factor.
Behind all the ambiguities and omissions concerning the conceptual apparatus of psychoanalytic philosophy, there is its methodological, heuristic and content limitations, which ultimately does not allow us to understand the nature of the unconscious [32].
If the psychoanalytic theory of knowledge is limited to the identification of unconscious drives, recognizing the limit beyond which a psychoanalyst who tries to comprehend the unconscious manifestations of a person cannot go further, does this not mean that Freud actually recognized the impossibility of revealing the nature of the unconscious mental by means of psychoanalysis?
It was precisely to this conclusion that the founder of psychoanalysis was forced to come [32].
Let's summarize some results on the above material.
1. Freud deeply developed the concept of the unconscious and the conscious.
He showed the presence of their complex structure, the hierarchy of components, the features of some mental processes, that is, Freud laid the foundation for a new systematic understanding of the organization of the human psyche.
2. The applied use of psychoanalytic theory, in terms of correcting the state of neurotics, does not allow us to consider its provisions in full for building a model of the human psyche.
3. The identification of the psychic object of the Self and its representation in the conscious and unconscious, gives rise to far reaching conclusions about the architecture of the psyche.
The analysis of this position is very important for building a model of the psyche.
4. Freud presents his theory in a systematic language that is convenient to interpret using symbolic formalism and based on this, as well as using some additional psychological and neurophysiological data [13,15,33,34,36] to develop an adequate model of the psyche, express it mathematically and implement it in the form of a program algorithm.
5. In view of the impossibility of cognition of the unconscious by means of psychoanalysis, it is necessary to use other, including creating new, scientific methodological and epistemological means.
© 2001-2013 Srinest.com.
All rights reserved.
The materials of this site can only be used with a link to this site
