Are we all neurotic?

coberst

Active member
Are we all neurotic?

My reading tells me that we are all neurotic and some of us are so neurotic that we cannot function satisfactorily in normal society and are then considered to be mentally ill.

All humans repress aspects of their life that might cause anxiety. This repression is called neurosis. It is the constant conflict wherein the ego constantly struggles to hold down thoughts that will cause anxiety. Freud discovered the unconscious in life and there exists a constant conflict between the unconscious and the ego. The ego keeps that in the unconscious that can cause anxiety from becoming conscious.

Humans are the only species to be self conscious. We dread death and repress that dread because we cannot live with a constant consciousness of our mortality.

Conflict is the essential characteristic of humanness.


Regression to animal existence is one answer to the quest to transcend separateness. Wo/man can try to eliminate that which makes her human but also tortures her; s/he can discard reason and self-consciousness. What is noteworthy here is that if everybody does it, it ain’t fiction; anything everyone does is reality, even if it is a virtual reality. For most people, reason and reality is nothing more than public consensus. “One never ‘loses one’s mind’ when nobody else’s mind differs from one’s own.”

Regression to our animal form of instinctual behavior happens when we replace our lost animal instincts with our own fully developed symbolic instincts; we can then program our self to uncritically follow these culturally formed instincts without further consideration. We can then do like the elephant parade; we hold the tail of the one in front of us with our trunk and march in file without any other thoughts to disturb our tranquility.

“The great characteristic of our time is that we know everything important about human nature that there is to know. Yet never has there been an age in which so little knowledge is securely possessed, so little a part of common understanding. The reason is precisely the advance of specialization, the impossibility of making safe general statements, which has led to a general imbecility.”

The steel worker on the girder
learned not to look down, and does his work
And there are words we have learned
Not to look at,
Not to look for substance
Below them. But we are on the verge
Of vertigo.

George Oppen

Norman Brown informs us that to comprehend Freud one must understand “repression”. “In the new Freudian perspective, the essence of society is repression of the individual, the essence of the individual is repression of the self.”

Freud discovered the importance of repression when he discovered the meaning of the “mad” symptoms of the mentally deranged, plus the meaning of dreams, and thirdly the everyday happenings regarded as slips of the tongue, errors, and random thoughts. He concludes that dreams, mental derangements, and common every day errors (Freudian slips) have meaningful causes that can be explained. Meaningful is the key word here.

Since these psychic phenomena are unconscious we must accept that we have motivation to action with a purpose for which we are unconscious (involuntary purposes). This inner nature of which we are completely unaware leads to Freud’s definition of psychoanalysis as “nothing more than the discovery of the unconscious in mental life.”

Freud discovered that sapiens have unconscious causes which are hidden from her because they are disowned and hidden by the conscious self. The dynamic relationship between the unconscious and conscious life is a constant battle and psychoanalysis is a science of this mental conflict.

The rejection of an idea which is one’s very own and remains so is repression. The essence of repression is in the fact that the individual refuses to recognize this reality of her very own nature. This nature becomes evident when it erupts into consciousness only in dreams or neurotic symptoms or by slips of the tongue.

The unconscious is illuminated only when it is being repressed by the conscious mind. It is a process of psychic conflict. “We obtain our theory of the unconscious from the theory of repression.” Freud’s hypothesis of the repressed unconscious results from the conclusion that it is common to all humans. This is a phenomenon of everyday life; neurosis is common to all humans.

Quotes from Ernest Becker, Pulitzer Prize for General Nonfiction Denial of Death




 
It's no use wasting one's time either denying or fearing death, as it comes to us all in it's own time.

I only have reservations about knowing the time of it's coming, and even then, depending upon the circumstances, I might have cause to welcome it.

Having already died once due to anaphylactic shock, I can honestly say that it not unpleasant. If you are lucky enough to be revived it's just like having been asleep.

And for those who believe in seeing ones family beckoning them across the great divide or seeing white lights or having an "out of body experience", I can assure you that it's all poppycock.
The steel worker on the girder
learned not to look down, and does his work ---snip---
George Oppen
George Oppen is a fool.

Steel workers DO look down. To move one's feet without knowing exactly where you are putting them is tantamount to suicide in such an environment. The steel worker merely does not to fear what he sees.

Coberst, If you wish to learn about life, your time would be far better spent observing your own life and that of those about you, rather than posting all this drivel written by some insecure dreamer who has never got off his arse and experienced that which he/she is dribbling about.
 
Last edited:
Some people obviously have very dull lives if they've got to theorise about such crap, when in fact "real life" is going on all about them, if they were only energetic enough to get off their duff and go and experience it.

I thought that was the response to paranoia not neurosis?.
Obviously you have not read the title of the thread Monty
 
Last edited:
Aristotle said that all men seek happiness. Freud said that the goal of the pleasure-principle is happiness. Man’s desire for happiness sets at odds to the reality-principle. It is the reality-principle that propels the world into tomorrow. Humans naturally seek what they wish but “reality imposes on human beings the necessity of renunciation of pleasures”.

Therein lay the rub and the rub is called repression.

Freud says that the whole edifice of psychoanalysis is constructed on the theory of repression—the essence of society is the repression of the individual--the essence of the individual is repression of him or her self—Freud’s theory is that the phenomena dreams, neurotic symptoms, and errors are caused—i.e. the principle of psychic determinism—they are meaningful because this means there is purpose or intention—“since the purport of these purposive expressions is generally unknown to the person whose purpose they express, Freud is driven to embrace the paradox that there are in a human being purposes of which he knows nothing, involuntary purpose”—i.e. unconscious ideas.

Neurosis is “the disease called man” Nietzsche. “Neurosis is an essential consequence of civilization or culture.” Brown

“Between “normality” and “abnormality” there is no qualitative but only a quantitative difference, based largely on the practical question of whether our neurosis is serious enough to incapacitate us for work.” The difference between “neurotic and healthy is only that the healthy have a socially useful form of neurosis.”

Freud defined psychoanalysis as “nothing more than discovery of the unconscious in mental life”—the other hypothesis is that “some unconscious ideas in a human being are incapable of becoming conscious to him in the ordinary way, because they are strenuously disowned and resisted by the conscious life”.

Norman Brown tells us that to comprehend Freud one must understand “repression”. “In the new Freudian perspective, the essence of society is repression of the individual, the essence of the individual is repression of the self.”

Freud discovered the importance of repression when he discovered the meaning of the “mad” symptoms of the mentally deranged, plus the meaning of dreams, and thirdly the everyday happenings regarded as slips of the tongue, errors, and random thoughts. He concludes that dreams, mental derangements, and common every day errors (Freudian slips) have meaningful causes that can be explained. Meaningful is the key word here.

Since these psychic phenomena are unconscious we must accept that we have motivation to action with a purpose for which we are unconscious (involuntary purposes). This inner nature of which we are completely unaware leads to Freud’s definition of psychoanalysis as “nothing more than the discovery of the unconscious in mental life.”

Freud discovered that sapiens have unconscious causes which are hidden from her because they are disowned and hidden by the conscious self. The dynamic relationship between the unconscious and conscious life is a constant battle and psychoanalysis is a science of this mental conflict.

The rejection of an idea which is one’s very own and remains so is repression. The essence of repression is in the fact that the individual refuses to recognize this reality of her very own nature. This nature becomes evident when it erupts into consciousness only in dreams or neurotic symptoms or by slips of the tongue.

The unconscious is illuminated only when it is being repressed by the conscious mind. It is a process of psychic conflict. “We obtain our theory of the unconscious from the theory of repression.” Freud’s hypothesis of the repressed unconscious results from the conclusion that it is common to all humans. This is a phenomenon of everyday life; neurosis is common to all humans.

Dreams are normal phenomena and being that the structure of dreams is common to neurotics and normal people the dream is also neurotic. “Between “normality” and “abnormality” there is no qualitative but only quantitative difference, based largely on the practical question of whether our neurosis is serious enough to incapacitate us for work…the doctrine of the universal neurosis of mankind is the psychoanalytical analogue of the theological doctrine of original sin.”

Quotes from “Life against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History” Norman O. Brown

 
Il put my two cents in.

I wont pretend to understand all of the original post. But I think we pretty much are neurotic. Certainly the world over the last few decades has gotten harder in some ways and less in others.

My parents used to have bomb drills in school but these days I think we are so used to the idea of ww3 we dont think so much.

Now as far as death goes. We all die one day and having been in the navy (or anyone in the service anywhere) should know going into it that there is a chance that you might lose your life. Not to get careless and throw it away. Its helps to know you can count on your mates.

I hope I diddnt totaly miss the topic.

Robert
 
Last edited:
Especially if we contemplate about death, how we are going to deal with it, etc., I give the *original* post all credit:

There exists a "collective" trend for death denial (we all somehow believe life is predictable/calculable vs. death being a feature that is rather unpredictacble/uncertain), while in reality it is all reverse:

Life is unpredictable, and death is certain.

Now, this *does* make us neurotic as a society (for the reasons scratched in the original post and many more), but:

I am going 60 fast now, I had this assumed already (educated by reading up on the theme from many philosophers/sociologists in the early ´70s being hardly 20 yrs old up to recent stuff concerned with soldiers/dependants/terminatly ill, etc.: Lessing, Claudius, Herder, Scheler, Mannheimm, Niewiadomski, Nassehi, just to name a few) for some decades.

And here is where this post starts to be annoying, from my POV:

Again Ms. Coberst (Mr.?) throws quotations *that so far all stem from Wikipedia* "to the swines" that have been really common (at least for ppl that follow such stuff and try to understand what "42" is all about :) ) knowledge for years or even decades.

A cheap move that costs her/him 39 secs, but me at least double.

I could spam the forum tomorrow with (literally) tons of - basically interesting, factually correct and even creative - stuff, and I keep asking myself, "what does he do that for"?

I am used to people arguing a POV and then (maybe for source or to alert, or to quote) add a link, but I am not used to see Wikipedia articles posted to a forum regularily and w/o having asked for it nor the poster trying to porve something with them...

I can find Wikpedia myself if I have to, thank you. If I wanted, just googling one of her headlines will instantly provide me with more stuff to read than I could digest in years, she/he does not utter a subjective opinion, she is wasting my time, and my time is little.

I am annoyed. Really. Big time.

Add, she/he does ot leave us interested a choice whether to look at that thread or not (if we not decide to simply ignore Ms. Coberst threads generally) as we at least have to look (and, frankly I am intrigued and curious to see) whether she/he posted something of her/his own, and the post titles sound interesting enough.

Clearly I could avoid this hassle and I even know it is my own fault if I keep falling for the bait (but it *is* a bait!), but also, in 25+ years of internet scrutiny, member of uncounted forums, lists etc., nobody ever has managed (or raised the feeling he was intending) to even make me think abut deciding whether I have to take a look at a thread and spend time on posts on his behalf or not (because usually the title and fellow posters make that fairly clear).

This is not the case here, I feel I am getting spammed, and I do not like it at all.

I ould respam, easily, and maybe even with new an interesting stuff (but thats the point, my ethics only allow me to do it once :) ):

The issues of casualties and presumed casualty aversion in democratic societies were of marginal importance in the German debate about civil-military relations in the 1990s. Although these issues were ever present, they were never studied in detail.

This article analyzes the reactions to German casualties by the political and military elites and by the press. It focuses on a number of recent cases of German soldiers who were killed in out-of-area missions. Our findings indicate that German society seems to be less casualty averse than is widely assumed. Two explanations for this are put forward: First, that Germany appears to have undergone a substantial learning process and seems ready to accept casualties for the "right" cause. Second, German society has become indifferent to military matters. Further research is needed to specify the extent to which these two hypotheses apply to different segments of German society.

[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif][SIZE=-2]Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 31, No. 4, 513-535 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0095327X0503100404[/SIZE][/FONT]
This quoted (it says something, but then also nothing), I still feel I am getting spammed.

Mods, would you consider doing something about it, plz?

Sincerely,

Rattler
 
Last edited:
Mods, would you consider doing something about it, plz?

Sincerely,

Rattler

Where would the mods stop though?
We have people who have made thousands of cut and paste posts pushing one ideology, theory or another if they haven't booted them for touch I can't see why they would worry about these posts. At least some of these generate interest rather than the flame fests of the political forum.

These posts are in the right forum (General Chat), they aren't offensive or abusive in any way I really don't see what the problem is?
 
Last edited:
Where would the mods stop though?
We have people who have made thousands of cut and paste posts pushing one ideology, theory or another if they haven't booted them for touch I can't see why they would worry about these posts. At least some of these generate interest rather than the flame fests of the political forum.

These posts are in the right forum (General Chat), they aren't offensive or abusive in any way I really don't see what the problem is?

Frankly, nor do I, they are "perfectly legal", and I know that sending mods on such a track could quickly end up with them being accused of "Censorship", "Arbitrarity" or "Despotism" (I am forum owner and also admin/mod in other forums myself, so I get the idea).

Still, this said and understood, I do feel annoyed, and I am not annoyed easily.

I am rather the live-and-let-live type, so, my guess is there *must* be something wrong with those posts (NOTE my lack of self doubt :) )

I think the key is in your first paragraph:

---We have people who have made thousands of cut and paste posts pushing one ideology, theory or another... -snip-

Yes. ..."pushing ... something"(easy to ignore/calibrate in comparison as you get the hang of the intent to base your decision upon).

Coberst does not fall into this pattern, as her/his posts are free from *whatever* subjectively expressed position (we can tell she/he knows Wikipedia, but thats about all; I have tried to see an "expression" of an opinion in the pattern of sum of the copy/pastes, but also there, the only common denominators are"Wikipedia" and "Philosophy and or Sociology". Wow.

These posts are antiseptically opinion free, and this simply makes them sterile and boring, yet the titles bait you to give a look, and this for me does not sound right in an opinion exchange place like a forum (but I am most probably wrong and can live with them anyway, just arguing for arguments sake here).

Can´t express myself better, but I note that these posts poitively *do* give me an itch.

Rattler
 
I don't know about you but it takes me about 3-10 seconds to determine whether I am going to take the time to comprehend a post, basically I skim it and make a call.

I do not consider that length of time a waste if at the end I can get into a worthwhile dialogue or simply move on to the next post, as I try and explain to people at work "in most cases it takes more time to complain about something than it takes to fix it" in this case pushing the "back" button.

In the end these are innocuous posts that a few people may find interesting and just because some people don't is no reason to get upset and call in the mods.
 
Well, it appears that both Rattler and I are reading from the same page. This person with his/her cut and past posts, annoys me no end, as i to feel that we are being spammed and none to subtly.

This person has little or no real interest in posting an opinion, or having any form of real debate but merely copies and pastes pages of crap, somewhat like those annoying pricks who continually overload peoples mailboxes with reams of jokes lifted off various internet joke pages.

A serial pest, typically arriving at about 0400Z+9.5 posting one post and gone again in 15 minutes usually without having even made a comment.
 
Much like email clients this forum has an ignore function, then you wont have to see the posts and you wont be upset by them.

Personally I think people need to lighten up a little and realise that not everything is about them and when you see a post with a posters name you don't like you stop yourself clicking on the link.

I have a strong feeling though that these boards are going to be mighty empty if we all block out people we don't agree with though.

Well, it appears that both Rattler and I are reading from the same page. This person with his/her cut and past posts, annoys me no end, as i to feel that we are being spammed and none to subtly.

This person has little or no real interest in posting an opinion, or having any form of real debate but merely copies and pastes pages of crap, somewhat like those annoying pricks who continually overload peoples mailboxes with reams of jokes lifted off various internet joke pages.

A serial pest, typically arriving at about 0400Z+9.5 posting one post and gone again in 15 minutes usually without having even made a comment.

And at no stage are you required or forced to read the posts.
To some degree this is like you reading my mail and then complaining that it was interesting enough for you.
 
Last edited:
Much like email clients this forum has an ignore function, then you wont have to see the posts and you wont be upset by them.

Personally I think people need to lighten up a little and realise that not everything is about them and when you see a post with a posters name you don't like you stop yourself clicking on the link..
I seem to remember you saying something to the effect that you would not put a member of this forum "on ignore" because that would just give him open slather to spread his views that you (and I, if I remember correctly) had exception to. I view this the same way.

Personally I see this persons "style" or lack of it, as detrimental to the forum as a whole and and a swipe at the credulity and goodwill of the members in general. People who just click the ignore button and let these things slide, are like those who would just walk on by if they saw someone in need of assistance.

I don't particularly care if he pulls your p**ser with this crap, but I am not happy with it, and it seems that it has attracted similar comments from several others. So I feel justified in saying that it's not just my cranky attitude, I don't mind saying his "style" caught my attention from his very first post.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top