Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

bookforum.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#41

Post by Ygg2 »

coldtea wrote: post #39
Ygg2 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People saying such have in mind some caricature of 19th century Freudian analysis Article mentions Freud's desire for death. Freud theory is bunk. It's unprovable, can't be verified, useless and outdated model. If psychology as a whole has a replication issue. Freud psychoanalytics has a deeply existential issue. > Which basically means "the final state the clickbait economy moves forward as its inherent tendency i…

> Article mentions Freud's desire for death. Yes. Which is not the same as a caricature of Freudian analysis. > Freud theory is bunk. It's unprovable, can't be verified Not everything has to be verified. This tendency of Anglosaxons/Analyticals to want to "verify" everything is bunk. Heck, it's itself unprovable and can't be verified (you can't verify the need for verification -- in the end you always get to some unv…

> Not everything has to be verified.

Not everything can be verified. However a self proposed science that isn't verified is just philosophy. Hence, my four elements from Aristotle.

What Freudian psychoanalysis has is a semblance of science. It reminds me of quacks selling quantum energies to cure your back problems. Only instead of quantum its Phlogiston.

> Heck, it's itself unprovable and can't be verified

An unprovable science is just philosophizing.

As for verification can't itself be verified. Purely theoretically - yes. However. Purely theoretically you could use a rock enchanted by your local witch doctor to send me this message.

Are you using such device (not based on science, and verification but magical powers) to communicate?

My point is, verification is based on things working in the real world, which psychoanalysis for the most part doesn't.

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#42

Post by hexxiiiz »

Ygg2 wrote: post #37
hexxiiiz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I did not find this article particularly deep, psychoanalysis has hardly been discredited. The core of the theory has been infused into almost every psychological modality practiced today aside from CBT, and studies have shown its general efficacy as a practice to be on par with others and in some cases superior. For the past 20 or so years, the field of neuropsychoanalysis under Mark Solms et al. has done a lo…

> Hardly been discredited. In 2015, psychoanalyst Bradley Peterson, who is also a child psychiatrist and director of the Institute for the Developing Mind at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, said: "I think most people would agree that psychoanalysis as a form of treatment is on its last legs." https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/magazine/tell-it-about-yo... Not really singing its praises. > Nobel Laureat Eric Kandel w…

The difference between Kandel and Feynman is that Kandel is a neuroscientist who understands psychoanalysis and Feynman clearly hadn't really read Freud's work, only expressing skepticism on the basis of his vague intuitions about how long it should take to come up with a theory.

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#43

Post by coldtea »

Ygg2 wrote: post #41
coldtea wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Article mentions Freud's desire for death. Yes. Which is not the same as a caricature of Freudian analysis. > Freud theory is bunk. It's unprovable, can't be verified Not everything has to be verified. This tendency of Anglosaxons/Analyticals to want to "verify" everything is bunk. Heck, it's itself unprovable and can't be verified (you can't verify the need for verification -- in the end you always get to some unv…

> Not everything has to be verified. Not everything can be verified. However a self proposed science that isn't verified is just philosophy. Hence, my four elements from Aristotle. What Freudian psychoanalysis has is a semblance of science. It reminds me of quacks selling quantum energies to cure your back problems. Only instead of quantum its Phlogiston. > Heck, it's itself unprovable and can't be verified An unprov…

>Purely theoretically you could use a rock enchanted by your local witch doctor to send me this message. Are you using such device (not based on science, and verification but magical powers) to communicate?

No, but that's probably a coincidence more than anything else. Other cultures have used such methods, and were satisfied by them!

We might say "sure, but they were ignorant, those methods didn't work", etc. -- but if they had no qualms about them at the time, our objection is somewhat moot...

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#44

Post by coldtea »

411111111111111 wrote: post #27
Pirgo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

World population by early 19th century was already 1 billion, what are you talking about?

yes, it was. the first industrialization started in the middle 18th century though, so not sure what your point is.

Probably that already in the "middle 18th century" it was close to a billion people (and in any case, many more than low thousands: hundreds of millions).

Heck, ancient Athens alone (a single Greek city) had a population in the "low thousands" in 500 B.C.

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#45

Post by detaro »

411111111111111 wrote: post #27
Pirgo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

World population by early 19th century was already 1 billion, what are you talking about?

yes, it was. the first industrialization started in the middle 18th century though, so not sure what your point is.

There is no point in the past 2000 years where world population is estimated to be "hundreds of thousands".

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#46

Post by Ygg2 »

hexxiiiz wrote: post #42
Ygg2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hardly been discredited. In 2015, psychoanalyst Bradley Peterson, who is also a child psychiatrist and director of the Institute for the Developing Mind at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, said: "I think most people would agree that psychoanalysis as a form of treatment is on its last legs." https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/magazine/tell-it-about-yo... Not really singing its praises. > Nobel Laureat Eric Kandel w…

The difference between Kandel and Feynman is that Kandel is a neuroscientist who understands psychoanalysis and Feynman clearly hadn't really read Freud's work, only expressing skepticism on the basis of his vague intuitions about how long it should take to come up with a theory.

Kandel got Nobel for medicine, namely memory physiological basis of neuron storage, not for proving psychoanalysis correct. His thoughts on it are as relevant as Feynman.

A counterexample - Tesla was also a genius Engineer but he also believed in Aliens, and doves with laser eyes, being infused by Cosmic energy.

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#47

Post by Ygg2 »

coldtea wrote: post #43
Ygg2 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not everything has to be verified. Not everything can be verified. However a self proposed science that isn't verified is just philosophy. Hence, my four elements from Aristotle. What Freudian psychoanalysis has is a semblance of science. It reminds me of quacks selling quantum energies to cure your back problems. Only instead of quantum its Phlogiston. > Heck, it's itself unprovable and can't be verified An unprov…

> Purely theoretically you could use a rock enchanted by your local witch doctor to send me this message. Are you using such device (not based on science, and verification but magical powers) to communicate? No, but that's probably a coincidence more than anything else. Other cultures have used such methods, and were satisfied by them! We might say "sure, but they were ignorant, those methods didn't work", etc. -- bu…

It's not coincidence. If you want something to work reliably, you need science. Regards of underlying system.

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#48

Post by hexxiiiz »

Ygg2 wrote: post #46
hexxiiiz wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between Kandel and Feynman is that Kandel is a neuroscientist who understands psychoanalysis and Feynman clearly hadn't really read Freud's work, only expressing skepticism on the basis of his vague intuitions about how long it should take to come up with a theory.

Kandel got Nobel for medicine, namely memory physiological basis of neuron storage, not for proving psychoanalysis correct. His thoughts on it are as relevant as Feynman. A counterexample - Tesla was also a genius Engineer but he also believed in Aliens, and doves with laser eyes, being infused by Cosmic energy.

Kandel's obvious expertise on the functioning of the brain puts him in precisely the right position to give an assessment of how realistic Freud's models in describing what happens in the brain. More specifically, his expertise on the neurology of memory is directly connected to a lot of what Freud hypothesized about how memory functions. In fact, in his 99 paper on psychoanalysis and neuroscience https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/ajp.156.4.... Kandel cites specific neuroscientific mechanisms that connect with mechanisms in the paychoanalytic model. This is very much his area of expertise and far more relevant than Feynman shooting from the hip about something he does not really know much about. Kandel is an expert in neuroscience and from the literature very well versed in psychoanalytic work, and makes actual arguments salient to both disciplines to justify his opinions, as can be seen in the above article.

In general, a lot of work has been done in this area, particularly by Solms https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vD4p8rQAAAAJ&hl=en...

Apropos of Tesla, this is far more than the paranoid spiritual fantasies of a genius struggling with mental illness.

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#49

Post by Ygg2 »

hexxiiiz wrote: post #48
Ygg2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kandel got Nobel for medicine, namely memory physiological basis of neuron storage, not for proving psychoanalysis correct. His thoughts on it are as relevant as Feynman. A counterexample - Tesla was also a genius Engineer but he also believed in Aliens, and doves with laser eyes, being infused by Cosmic energy.

Kandel's obvious expertise on the functioning of the brain puts him in precisely the right position to give an assessment of how realistic Freud's models in describing what happens in the brain. More specifically, his expertise on the neurology of memory is directly connected to a lot of what Freud hypothesized about how memory functions. In fact, in his 99 paper on psychoanalysis and neuroscience https://ajp.psychia…

Ok, but did Kandel proved Freud right? Did he found proof for ego, id, super-ego, Thanatos/Eros in brain morphology? Me skimming it shows little to no evidence of so, hence his contributing to prove Freud right is no more different than what Feynman did.

I did found this gem though:

> Thus, unlike various forms of cognitive therapy and other psychotherapies, for which compelling objective evidence now exists—both as therapies in their own right and as key adjuncts to pharmacotherapy—there is as yet no compelling evidence, outside subjective impressions, that psychoanalysis works better than nonanalytically oriented therapy or placebo.

So wait. Even he admits Psychoanalysis is less useful than what we have currently. Way to bury the lede.

From what I see, this is more a rally to revive psychoanalysis on solid biological grounds, than confirmation of psycho analysis as such.

Re: A psychoanalytic reading of social media and the death drive

#50

Post by hexxiiiz »

Ygg2 wrote: post #49
hexxiiiz wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kandel's obvious expertise on the functioning of the brain puts him in precisely the right position to give an assessment of how realistic Freud's models in describing what happens in the brain. More specifically, his expertise on the neurology of memory is directly connected to a lot of what Freud hypothesized about how memory functions. In fact, in his 99 paper on psychoanalysis and neuroscience https://ajp.psychia…

Ok, but did Kandel proved Freud right? Did he found proof for ego, id, super-ego, Thanatos/Eros in brain morphology? Me skimming it shows little to no evidence of so, hence his contributing to prove Freud right is no more different than what Feynman did. I did found this gem though: > Thus, unlike various forms of cognitive therapy and other psychotherapies, for which compelling objective evidence now exists—both as…

The question is not whether Kandel proved anything, but merely whether psychoanalysis has been discredited. I am not making the case here that it is proven, verified, or completely substantiated in any particular way (here at least). That people are still taking its ideas seriously in mainstream research fields is enough to show that it is not discredited. The whole point of the aforementioned article is argue that psychoanalysis has credibility as a theory.

Kandel points out several connections between ideas from Freud's model and potential neuroscientific correlates. The subsequent works of Solms have further pursued these connections as a rigorous scientific project. How can you compare all of this to Feynman arguing against psychoanalysis on the basis of personally doubting someone could come up with it?

These are not marginal outsiders doing basement research. A theory being discredited means that there is a consensus in research against it. There is plenty of active research in reputable institutions both in psychoanalysis and neuroscience as I linked to explicitly, as well as in therapy research (which could be surfaced pretty easily). Many may have contested psychoanalysis, but tis is not what a discredited theory looks like.

Post reply on HN