Copernicus, Darwin,......Freud?

Copernicus, Darwin,.... Freud?

Freud said that these three thinkers - he astonishlingly included himself - were the three most important deflators of human vanity in all time.

Since each one had supposedly given (European) humanity a very big blow to its grand view of itself. Each one had given humanity a historic humiliation. Firstly, Copernicus's discovery that the Earth was not the centre of the universe. Secondly, Darwin's discovery that humankind was just another member of the animal kingdom, and thirdly Freud's discovery of... nothing whatsoever.

Er.

If you ask me, I personally think that Copernicus and Darwin did indeed discovere things that humiliated humanity and changed its view of itself, and they both stand the test of time as well.

But Freud was something quite different.

Freud discovered nothing whatsoever. So struck no blow to human vanity at all.

Freud had nothing to say.

And what is perhaps worse, he believed with some intensity that he had a lot to say.

The only way that Freud struck a view to human vanity was by prooving how easily humanity can be misled!

For an interesting discussion of this point, please see:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/copernicus-darwin-and-freud-a-tale-of-science-and-narcissism/

-----------------------------------------------------

If anything I would replace Freud with Szasz in this three-part sequence of thinkers who deflated human vanity - because Szasz pointed out the obvious truth that should today be more acknowledged - calling other people "mad" is nothing but bullying. That is a genuine blow to human vanity that is sorely needed.

Freud and Psychiatry

Freud - historically speaking - was a MAJOR FIGURE in creating and developing the CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY that is "Psychiatry".

So if you are inspired to protest by blogs like this one the best way would be to continue to achieve the absolute destruction of the crime against humanity that is "Psychiatry".

And to counter in every way that you can the deep scars that "Psychiatry" and the simply imbecillic belief in the lie of "Mental Illness" have left across human culture and society.

Very deep scars and a great deal of damage to European and world culture and society.

Pathology

Pathology can only - did you hear / see / read that last word? - ONLY have reference to

PHYSICAL BIOLOGICAL ORGANISMS!........


A "Psycho-pathology" is an absolute impossibility. A logical and semantic error and impossibility and a category error.

The ONLY thing that can have a Pathology in an unqualified absolute sense is a biological organism.

"Freud was not interested in scientific proof".

"Freud was not interested in scientific proof".

Thomas S. Szasz.

www.szasz.com

"Neurosis" and its related term "Psychosis" are NON-SCIENTIFIC, FAKE terms.

"Neurosis" and its related term "Psychosis" are NON-SCIENTIFIC, FAKE terms.


Both are FAKE terms.


Both terms come from around the same period - the late 1800s. Both were used by Freud and Freudians.

"Psychosis" is ultimately a fake way of saying you disapprove or diagree with someone's beliefs or thorts. Ostensibly it means a "break with reality". Well - how does this exclude a simple mistake? And who defines "reality"?
Beliefs aren't illnesses. And cannot be.

"Neurosis" is a way of saying that you disapprove of someone's thorts or feelings and that you believe that has something to do with their nerves - though you have never examined their physical nerves.
In fact as I have said before "Neurosis" has NOTHING to do with the nerves and is not supposed to!
"Worrisome" is another way of saying "neurotic" - and no more precise in ANY type of discourse.


Also - I will repeat that "a nervous breakdown" is a FAKE TERM.

IF it means "a life crisis" and has NOTHING OBSERVABLY related to the nervous system then it is a misleading, fake term.


------------------------------------------------------------

It is time to tidy up our entire global culture - into which terminology like this has been spilled.
Like after a horrendous oil tanker disaster, which happened around 1900! :)

The point is these are supposedly scientific terms - and yet are not.
That means that the task of finding more accurate ways of describing our problems is vital.

"The Cyclepatheticology of Everyday Shit" by Shitmundo Fraud :)

"The Cyclepatheticology of Everyday Shit" by Shitmundo Fraud.

I reckons like, geezer, you see that Roger Bacon, DOCTOR MIRABILIS, you see that geezer there right. Medieval Franciscan Oxonian Scholar English Genius like. I reckons like that he fecked pigs. I reckons he was a pigsexual like coz he liked to Roger Bacon. But then I never actually knew him like so if you fink this arse shite is in any way scientific you should go feck yourself up the arse.

Shitmundo Fraud. MD, Massiv Dikhed. :)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Freud was worse than "Scientology"!

Freud was worse than "Scientology"!

"Dianetics" and all of "Scientology" are a load of incomprehensible, reprehensible rubbish with no bearing whatsoever upon reality of any kind. Their intention is to deceive and to exploit.

The same could be said of Freud's works. Though perhaps Freud genuinely believed in his ideas, whereas L.Ron Hubbard almost certainly did not.

Though their intention is not necessarily to deceive, the writings of Freud are possibly more deceptive in effect than those of Hubbard and Scientology. They have certainly deceived many important figures in our culture. This is one reason why they are possibly yet more contemptible than those of Hubbard and Scientology.