Topic: The sadists projects his maschoism onto others
Anonymous A started this discussion 7 years ago#85,599
There's a theory in the psychoanalytic "field" that goes like this:
trauma is when something significant fails to produce a meaningful experience. There's something which wrecked all your feelings but there's nothing you can do with them because you can't even understand the thing that wrecked it.
Second:
we are all traumatized by our childhood.
Our discovery of things that maturity brings, sexuality for example, is a kind of a overwhelming mess of desires and identity changing stuff.
Third:
The maschoists turned a traumatizing experience into a sexual one, the comfort being that it was actually a experience of love. That's how they could break through their own little personal traumas that we all have and deal with in the same kind of struggling fashion without even noticing it.
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 hours later[^][v]#980,682
It will never cease to amuse me that there are still people who consider 'psychology' and Freudian voodooism to be anything other than a primitive and fatally over-simplified attempt to explain highly complex issues. What was it Hannibal Lecter once said? "Nothing happened to me, Officer Starling. I happened. You can't reduce me to a set of influences".
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 2 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#980,700
@previous (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
I don't think I would call what OP is doing 'psychology' at all. Stringing together unfounded assertions and generalizations that all rest on a nebulous and novel definition of 'trauma' is just called wild speculating about the causes of things.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 4 hours later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#980,715
I'm a layman and this is actually a lacanian theory which is supposed to be a improvement of Freudian theories.
Father Merrin, i must urge you to reconsider your stance on psychoanalysis. Your stance is uninformed and barbarian like, reflective of a stupidity that you don't have.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 7 years ago, 9 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#980,785
Because it's a very uninformed thing to think about psychoanalysis that way. It may not hold up to rigorous scientific testing but of course it won't when they are working with specific subjects each time, experimenting and improving while they are at it.