The Interpretation of Dreams -Sigmund Freud (original) (raw)
Related papers
Sigmund Freud The Interpretation of Dreams
The advance of scientific knowledge has not left The Interpretation of Dreams untouched. When I wrote this book in 1899 there was as yet no "sexual theory," and the analysis of the more complicated forms of the psychoneuroses was still in its infancy. The interpretation of dreams was intended as an expedient to facilitate the psychological analysis of the neuroses; but since then a profounder understanding of the neuroses has contributed towards the comprehension of the dream. The doctrine of dream-interpretation itself has evolved in a direction which was insufficiently emphasized in the first edition of this book. From my own experience, and the works of Stekel and other writers, [1] I have since learned to appreciate more accurately the significance of symbolism in dreams (or rather, in unconscious thought). In the course of years, a mass of data has accumulated which demands consideration.
Reconsidering Freud’s Dream Theory
International Journal of Dream Research, 2019
This article aims at facilitating the understanding of Freud´s dream theory for psychoanalytic as well as non-psychoanalytic clinicians and scientists. The new perspective is based on a section of An Outline of Psychoanalysis (Freud, 1938) which, to date, does not appear to have been considered adequately. This section comprises a dense summary of Freud´s dream theory applying the structural viewpoint (ego, id and super-ego). It is suggested that this section be considered as akin to a set of explanatory notes for the reading of The Interpretation of Dreams (Freud, 1900), which is illustrated herein by applying it to several paragraphs of this work. In doing so, it becomes apparent that The Interpretation of Dreams does not need to be re-written in order to integrate the structural viewpoint. Rather, both the topographical (conscious, preconscious and unconscious) and the structural viewpoint can be elegantly merged. Finally, the introduced perspective is compared to previous psycho...
International Journal of Dream Research, 2020
Our paper aimed at facilitating the understanding and handling of Freud’s dream theory. We are grateful for critical comments on our contribution by Volker Hartmann which prompt us to differentiate more explicitly between verbal and perceptual representations of the latent dream thought within Freud´s dream theory. We will thus integrate the differentiation between the following two concepts in our previous arguments: The unconscious formation of the preconscious and verbal latent dream thought: The dream work by the unconscious ego replaces the sleep-disturbing stimuli – demands upon the ego – by a harmless preconscious wish-fulfilment that still has a verbal form, called latent dream thought. This process is dominated by the different defense-mechanisms of the ego, including displacement, condensation, reversal to the contrary and symbolization. The transformation of the verbal dream-thought into a perception of things: Dream work continues by transforming – in a regressive cereb...
e FUNDAMENTAL IMPLICATIONS OF SIGMOND FREUD'S DREAM ANALYSIS
For Freud, dreams are fundamentally guardian of sleep, they extinguish all external and internal stimuli. Essentially, should one continue to sleep undisturbed, strong negative emotions, forbidden thoughts and unconscious desires have to be disguised or censored in some form or another, while confronted by these, the dreamer would be terrified. Freud believed the dream to be composed of two parts; the manifest and the latent content although in rare cases they are indistinguishable. However, latent content is transformed into manifest content through a process he called "dream work" which, in four ways, disguises and distorts the latent thoughts. But how does this account for a subjective personal unconscious experience? What are dreams? Are they only sexually meaningful and symbolic as Freud inferred? How substantial is Freud's principle of dream symbols and possibility of arriving at the meaning of dreams? Does this theory give any understanding of the dreamer's subconscious? With the critically analysis method, the researcher examines the implications of Freud's analysis of dreams and concludes affirmatively that to say that dreams are only sexually meaningful and symbolic, is a position of an extreme reactionist as dreams also have deep psychological, epistemological and religious significant value to human psycho understanding.
The Analysis and Creation of Dream Meaning
Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 1998
I wish to convey the enthusiasm that I feel about dreams, their significance in clinical work, and the many new ways that we have learned to understand them. I would also like to familiarize the reader with some findings about dreams that have come from neurobiologists and cognitive scientists. Some of those researchers have made broadside attacks on the psychoanalytic theory of dreams and the practice of dream interpretation; psychoanalysts have either returned the hostility or simply ignored the empirical research. My own view is that both empirical researchers and practicing psychoanalysts could benefit by a serious exchange of information. The current gap between psychoanalysis and neurobiology did not exist when psychoanalysis was founded. Freud's first scientific research (1877) was on animal neurology, the development of the nervous system of the eel. Later, one of Freud's major works was the Project for a Scientific Psychology (1895), which attempted to create a model of human mental functioning based on the neurological knowledge of his time. This work is still appreciated by cognitive neuroscientists today. If one studies the Project carefully, one realizes that most of Freud's later thinking about psychoanalytic metapsychology had its origins in the psychoneural model that he developed in the Project. Over the years, however, psychoanalysis, cognitive science, and neurobiology have become estranged from one another, although something of a dialogue (not always friendly) between the fields has continued, especially in the area of dreams. I would like to reconsider the relation of psychoanalysis to cognitive neuroscience by focusing on the theory of dreams. We will look at how modern psychoanalysis theorizes about dreams, how we approach dreams clinically, and how we can integrate the data from cognitive neuroscience with clinical observations about dreaming. The psychoanalytic view of dreams has changed dramatically in the hundred years since Freud published The Interpretation of Dreams. Many psychoanalysts, from Jung to the present, have questioned Freud's conclusion that all dreams are caused by unacceptable wishes. The White Institute has been among the leaders in revising psychoanalytic dream theory. In 1950, Frieda Fromm-Reichmann argued that many dreams do not deal with wish-fulfillment. Erich Fromm (1951) saw in the dream an attempt to express psychodynamic conflict. Paul Lippmann (1998) sees dreams as responding to both private concerns and social factors. Edgar Levenson (1983, 1991) has shown how dreams often portray the most simple truths about the dreamer's experience, truths so blunt that in the clinical setting, neither patient nor analyst may fully understand them without first reenacting them during the process of dream interpretation. I have argued (Blechner, 1983) that dreams may express things that are An earlier version was presented at a conference of the
Direct interpretation of dreams: Typology
The American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 1992
DIRECT INTERPRETATION OF DREAMS: TYPOLOGY I.eland van den Daele Freud's general formulation of dream genesis, upon which he appears to hinge his theory of dreams, is his assertion that a dream is the product of the "disguised fulfillment of a suppressed or repressed wish" (1900, p. 160). This formulation is the cornerstone of his clinical theory. The clinical theory assumes that psychological conflict is at the basis of neurosis, and that psychological conflict is exactly modeled in the dream. That is, the dream is the laboratory of neurosis. In a general review of Freud's theory of dream interpretation, it is useful to distinguish a theory of genesis and a theory of translation. The theory of genesis addresses the source and the motivational foundation of dreams. The theory of translation deals with the mechanics of dream interpretation, much in the same way as grammars and dictionaries provide rules and referents for the translation of languages. In the general literature on Freud's theory, the theory of genesis and the theory of translation are treated as interdependent and overlapping. Nevertheless, the theories may be disentangled, just as what is written and the question of why it was written may be distinguished. The problem with a wish fulfillment theory is that it constrains. In the limits it imposes, the dream is permitted only a self-oriented, affect-laden aim that tends toward discharge. If the imagistic language of dreams is understood as a general language that may express any variety of meaning, Freud's constraint is analogous to a constraint on the writing of English that it should only concern topics that suggest or lead to sensual release. The contention that a dream, including Freud's dream of Irma's Injection, represents more than the fulfillment of a wish is furthered by investi-Portions of this paper were delivered at the Eleventh Annual Spring Meeting of the American Psychological Association Division of Psychoanalysis. Chicago, Illinois: April 1991. My gratitude to students and patients for use of their dreams.
Sigmund Freud, 1900
Wheras there was a space of nine years between the first and second editions of this book, the need of a third edition was apparent when little more than a year had elapsed. I ought to be gratified by this change; but if I was unwilling previously to attribute the neglect of my work to its small value, I cannot take the interest which is now making its appearance as proof of its quality. But the very context to which our subject owes its importance must be held responsible for the deficiencies of the following chapters. The abundant lacunae in this exposition represent so many points of contact at which the problem of dream-formation is linked up with the more comprehensive problems of psycho-pathology; problems which cannot be treated in these pages, but which, if time and powers suffice and if further material presents itself, may be elaborated elsewhere. The peculiar nature of the material employed to exemplify the interpretation of dreams has made the writing even of this treatise a difficult task. Consideration of the methods of dream-interpretation will show why the dreams recorded in the literature on the subject, or those collected by persons unknown to me, were useless for my purpose; I had only the choice between my own dreams and those of the patients whom I was treating by psychoanalytic methods. But this later material was inadmissible, since the dream-processes were undesirably complicated by the intervention of neurotic characters. And if I relate my own dreams I must inevitably reveal to the gaze of strangers more of the intimacies of my psychic life than is agreeable to me, and more than seems fitting in a writer who is not a poet but a scientific investigator. To do so is painful, but unavoidable; I have submitted to the necessity, for otherwise I could not have demonstrated my psychological conclusions. Sometimes, of course, I could not resist the temptation to mitigate my indiscretions by omissions and substitutions; but wherever I have done so the value of the example cited has been very definitely diminished. I can only express the hope that my readers will understand my difficult position, and will be indulgent; and further, that all those persons who are in any way concerned in the dreams recorded will not seek to forbid our dream-life at all events to exercise freedom of thought! The Interpretation of Dreams CHAPTER 1 THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE OF DREAM-PROBLEMS (UP TO 1900) In the following pages I shall demonstrate that there is a psychological technique which makes it possible to interpret dreams, and that on the application of this technique every dream will reveal itself as a psychological structure, full of significance, and one which may be assigned to a specific place in the psychic activities of the waking state. Further, I shall endeavour to elucidate the processes which underlie the strangeness and obscurity of dreams, and to deduce from these processes the nature of the psychic forces whose conflict or cooperation is responsible for our dreams. This done, my investigation will terminate, as it will have reached the point where the problem of the dream merges into more comprehensive problems, and to solve these we must have recourse to material of a different kind. I shall begin by giving a short account of the views of earlier writers on this subject, and of the status of the dream-problem in contemporary science; since in the course of this treatise I shall not often have occasion to refer to either. In spite of thousands of years of endeavour, little progress has been made in the scientific understanding of dreams. This fact has been so universally acknowledged by previous writers on the subject that it seems hardly necessary to quote individual opinions. The reader will find, in the works listed at the end of this work, many stimulating observations, and plenty of interesting material relating to our subject, but little or nothing that concerns the true nature of the dream, or that solves definitely any of its enigmas. The educated layman, of course, knows even less of the matter. The conception of the dream that was held in prehistoric ages by primitive peoples, and the influence which it may have exerted on the formation of their conceptions of the universe, and of the soul, is a theme of such great interest that it is only with reluctance that I refrain from dealing with it in these pages. I will refer the reader to the well-known works of Sir John Lubbock (Lord Avebury), Herbert Spencer, E. B. Tylor, and other writers; I will only add that we shall not realize the importance of these problems and speculations until we have completed the task of dreaminterpretation that lies before us. A reminiscence of the concept of the dream that was held in primitive times seems to underlie the evaluation of the dream which was current among the peoples of classical antiquity.[1] They took it for granted that dreams were related to the world of the supernatural beings in whom they believed, and that they brought inspirations from the gods and demons. Moreover, it appeared to them that dreams must serve a special purpose in respect of the dreamer; that, as a rule, they predicted the future. The extraordinary variations in the content of dreams, and in the impressions which they produced on the dreamer, made it, of course, very difficult to formulate a coherent conception of them, and necessitated manifold differentiations and group-formations, according to their value and reliability. The valuation of dreams by the individual philosophers of antiquity naturally depended on the importance which they were prepared to attribute to manticism in general. In the two works of Aristotle in which there is mention of dreams, they are already regarded as constituting a problem of psychology. We are told Hildebrandt (p. 23): "It has already been expressly admitted that a dream sometimes brings back to the mind, with a wonderful power of reproduction, remote and even forgotten experiences from the earliest periods of one's life." Strumpell (p. 40): "The subject becomes more interesting still when we remember how the dream sometimes drags out, as it were, from the deepest and densest psychic deposits which later years have piled upon the earliest experiences of childhood, the pictures of certain persons, places and things, quite intact, and in all their original freshness. This is confined not merely to such impressions as were vividly perceived at the time of their occurrence, or were associated with intense psychological values, to recur later in the dream as actual reminiscences which give pleasure to the waking mind. On the contrary, the depths of the dream-memory rather contain such images of persons, places, things and early experiences as either possessed but little consciousness and no psychic value whatsoever, or have long since lost both, and therefore appear totally strange and unknown, both in the dream and in the waking state, until their early origin is revealed." Volkelt (p. 119): "It is especially to be remarked how readily infantile and youthful reminiscences enter into our dreams. What we have long ceased to think about, what has long since lost all importance for us, is constantly recalled by the dream." The control which the dream exercises over material from our childhood, most of which, as is well known, falls into the lacunae of our conscious memory, is responsible for the production of interesting hypermnesic dreams, of which I shall cite a few more examples. Maury relates (p. 92) that as a child he often went from his native city, Meaux, to the neighbouring Trilport, where his father was superintending the construction of a bridge. One night a dream transported him to Trilport and he was once more playing in the streets there. A man approached him, wearing a sort of uniform. Maury asked him his name, and he introduced himself, saying that his name was C, and that he was a bridgeguard. On waking, Maury, who still doubted the actuality of the reminiscence, asked his old servant, who had been with him in his childhood, whether she remembered a man of this name. "Of course," was the reply; "he used to be watchman on the bridge which your father was building then." Maury records another example, which demonstrates no less clearly the reliability of the reminiscences of childhood that emerge in our dreams. M. F., who as a child had lived in Montbrison, decided, after an absence of twenty-five years, to visit his home and the old friends of his family. The night before his departure he dreamt that he had reached his destination, and that near Montbrison he met a man whom he did not know by sight, and who told him that he was M. F., a friend of his father's. The dreamer remembered that as a child he had known a gentleman of this name, but on waking he could no longer recall his features. Several days later, having actually arrived at Montbrison, he found once more the locality of his dream, which he had thought was unknown to him, and there he met a man whom he at once recognized as the M. F. of his dream, with only this difference, that the real person was very much older than his dream-image. Here I might relate one of my own dreams, in which the recalled impression takes the form of an association. In my dream I saw a man whom I recognized, while dreaming, as the doctor of my native town. His face was not distinct, but his features were blended with those of one of my schoolmasters, whom I still meet from time to time. What association there was between the two persons I could not discover on waking, but upon questioning my mother concerning the doctor I learned that he was a one-eyed man. The schoolmaster, whose image in my dream obscured that of the physician, had also only one eye. I had not seen the doctor for thirty-eight years, and as far as I know I had never thought of him in my waking state, although a scar on my chin might have reminded me of his professional...
Freud's Dream Analysis and Cricital Aspects
2019
Dreams, Interpretation of Dreams, Sexuality, Subconcious, Councious, Classes of Dreams, Jung, Collective and Personal Subconcious, Dream in Dream, Past-Now-Future, Symbolic Dreams, Free Association Method, Psycho-analysis, Psico-theraphy, Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud.
On the Phenomenological Investigations into the Psychology of Dreaming
Philosophy International Journal ISSN: 2641-9130, 2023
In 1900 the publication of the book, Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud raised very seminal and fascinating questions in the disciplines of psychology and psychoanalysis. Sigmund Freud's intellectual contributions and the discovery of unconscious had given a big jolt to all the classical approaches, shook the disciplinary foundations of psychology and placed 'psychoanalysis' as an alternative model for understanding mental world. Psychologists across the world showed keen interest in uncovering the mysteries of dreams and dreaming. But the institutional dominance of Behaviorism and its standards of research didn't allow them to cross the boundaries of conventional psychology. Behavioristic psychologists raised important questions on the methodology adopted by Sigmund Freud and leveled criticism against his unverifiable explanations. Behaviorism branded his theories as absolute subjectivist and unscientific. Hence, most of the psychologists were silent and systematically marginalized dream research and banished the discourses on dreams in the institutions of higher learning and research. The nineteenth century saw the emergence of the first dream studies, which were primarily concerned with dream phenomenology. Nevertheless, the pace of methodical dream research was held considerably by the emergence of distinct psychological movements at the start of the 20th century: behaviorism, classical psychoanalysis, and gestalt psychology, placed greater stress on the significance and meaning of dreams, as well as what they symbolized in the lives of individuals. Also a few of them questioned the reality of dreams and other similar mental experiences. Consequently, every movement undermined the greater sample sizes and more methodical research on dreams in its own unique manner. While presenting the views of Sigmund Freud, John Watson, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, and Fritz Perls this paper makes an attempt to show how classical schools of psychology slowed down the flow of systematic dream studies with large samples.