TOPIC: Sigmund Freud DEBUNKED

Born Sigismund Schlomo Freud and some call him Sickmind Fraud for good reasons.

Btw, Freud means JOY in German.







I start this thread because, with your help if you are interested, I would like us to shed a light on how he was just another fraudster whose THEORIES still have huge influence on society and are fundamental and crucial for all mind control techniques used on us by the current system.



See directly connected topics on this forum:
TAVISTOCK INSTITUTE
FRANKFURT SCHOOL and EARLY SEXUALIZATION - Kinsey & Paedophile/Porn Agenda
Historic Origins of Paedophilia / Child Rape
All topics about POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, GENDERISM, FEMINISM, GAY AGENDA ........

.

I would have thought that the work of psychologists such as watson and skinner had far more influence on 'mind control' and manipulation than freuds. Particularly because it is the behavioural and cognitive branches of psychology that 'won' over psychoanalysis - psychoanalysis being about the self and cognitive behavioural about changing the individual in order to conform to societies expectations.

And then there is the impact his work had on society as his nephew set out to exploit Sickman Freuds legacy.

Freud was a pervert. He believed that an individual isn't actually responsible for their acts, as they act out of instinct. He advocated a lack of personal responsibility for ones actions.

He also believed that libido starts at birth. He was very interested in the "sexual behaviors" of children.

His theories were developed AFTER the birth of his daughter Anna. There is a lot of speculation that he sexually molested his daughter. It is probable given he expressed his own sexual desires for his MOTHER!

Anna Freud's relationship with her father is suspicious. She has a private letter she submitted to the Library of Congress in 1952. She does not want it opened until 2020 long after she has passed. Is this not a little suspicious? What is in that letter that is so private that she does not want it open until 2020 long after she is dead?

Just do a search for "1952 Closed until 2020" under Anna Freud.
memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/h?faid/faid:@field(DOCID+ms004017)

First of all I am disgusted of how Sigmund Freud views the actions of people. His " The Unconscious" theory or better known as the Id, Ego, and Super-Ego basically suggest that people are not responsible for their own actions because of "Instinct." For example a man like Ted Bundy who raped and killed over 30 women would not be responsible for his actions because the "Instinct" in him is what did it. I for one believe that "EVERYONE" is responsible for their own actions and are aware of what is right and wrong.

Another disgusting ideal that Sigmund concocted is the psychosexual development theory in which it states that from birth, humans have instinctual sexual appetites which unfold in a series of stages. You can read it all up here...

So how did he get these conclusions? You can clearly see his researched is based mainly on under aged children. I'm not saying you have to sexually experiment with a child to get such results, but its very suspicious that a man who has concocted the idea that people are not responsible for their actions would also be researching psychosexual development targeted at children.

The really creepy part is that Anna Freud was born in 1895. He started writing this theory after she was born...

Freud originally posited childhood sexual abuse as a general explanation for the origin of neuroses, but he abandoned this so-called "seduction theory" as insufficiently explanatory. He noted finding many cases in which apparent memories of childhood sexual abuse were based more on imagination than on real events. During the late 1890s Freud, who never abandoned his belief in the sexual etiology of neuroses, began to emphasize fantasies built around the Oedipus complex as the primary cause of hysteria and other neurotic symptoms. Despite this change in his explanatory model, Freud always recognized that some neurotics had in fact been sexually abused by their fathers. He explicitly discussed several patients whom he knew to have been abused.
Freud: A Life for Our Time. pp. 95.

If that is not enough to convince you, his daughter Anna moved away from the classical position of her father, who was focusing his writings primarily on the unconscious Id (a perspective she found to be restrictive) and instead emphasized the importance of the ego, the constant struggle and conflict it is experiencing by the need to answer contradicting wishes, desires, values and demands of reality. By this, she established the importance of the ego functions and the concept of defense mechanism.

Sigmund Freud must have sexually abused his child Anna to get such an idea. He feels guilt in what he has done, so he has concocted this notion of "instinct" over personal responsibility to cover up his crime. Anna's work is completely different from her fathers in which she greatly emphasizes personal responsibility. The letter that she wrote might contain the truth about her relationship with her father.

Perhaps we may never know until 2020. I'm guessing that people that respected the man might have a different view of him if that was the truth.

You would also have to consider that people are conditioned and influenced by society, peer pressure, education and legislation as they form their personal morals and values. That's what makes the influence of the likes of Freud so harmful. If people in positions that can influence society adopt the views of one particular school of thought as the foundation of their views, and then administer those views on the wider society particularly in eduction. Often these ideas get introduced through education as that tends to the logical point to introduce new concepts and ideas. The problem is all too often these ideas are introduced to serve an agenda, rather than being fully developed and tested against the alternative data that my not serve the ideals of those with a social agenda. There were other people researching in the same field and yet the public conciousness is presented with Freud's perspective.

I think his work would also need to be considered in a historical context and the values of society as well as political interests at that time. Which may include the influences of the eugenics movement and the political developments with respect to urban developments, labour and women's rights etc. as industrialisation starts to reach maturity.

There are some interesting points raised in this discussion.

I also happen to think that people are responsible for their own actions, but I wouldn't discard the effects of external influences that shape peoples views.

Frog wrote:

Thanks for this most important video. I wasn't aware of Edward Bernays' huge influence on WAR propaganda and mind control.



HISTORY IS A WEAPON

Propaganda (1928)

by Edward Bernays


www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html



"If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it? The recent practice of propaganda has proved that it is possible, at least up to a certain point and within certain limits."

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays


Whenever I look deeper into any kind of manipulation, propaganda and blatant lies the same kind of names and backgrounds spring up like mushrooms. This is why I say that there is no such thing as coincidence any longer for me.
.

THE BIG FREUD FAMILY


All rich, famous and influential - and thus most interested in keeping up the FREUD MYTH.



Ernst Ludwig Freud (6 April 1892 in Vienna – 7 April 1970 in London) was an Austrian architect and the fourth child of Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud and his German-born wife Martha Bernays. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Ludwig_Freud


Sir Clement Raphael Freud (24 April 1924 in Berlin – 15 April 2009), son of Ernst Ludwig Freud, was a British broadcaster, writer, politician and chef. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Freud


Matthew Freud (born 2 November 1963), son of Sir Clement Raphael Freud, husband of Rupert Murdoch's daughter Elisabeth Murdoch, is head of Freud Communications, an international public relations firm in the United Kingdom. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Freud


Emma Vallencey Freud OBE, (born 25 January 1962), daughter of Sir Clement Raphael Freud, is an English broadcaster and cultural commentator. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Freud




Stephen (Stephan) Gabriel Freud - The forgotten Freud: The lesser known brother of Clement and Lucian is the most splendidly eccentric of all
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1173064/The-forgotten-Freud-The-lesser-known-brother-Clement-Lucian-splendidly-eccentric-all.html



Lucian Michael Freud, OM, CH (8 December 1922 – 20 July 2011) was a German-born British painter. His works are noted for their psychological penetration, and for their often discomforting examination of the relationship between artist and model. Born in Berlin, Freud was the son of a German Jewish mother, Lucie (née Brasch), and an Austrian Jewish father, Ernst L. Freud, an architect. He was a grandson of Sigmund Freud, and elder brother of the late broadcaster, writer and politician Clement Freud (thus uncle of Emma and Matthew Freud) and the younger brother of Stephan Gabriel Freud. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian_Freud


Bella Freud (born 17 April 1961) is a London-based fashion designer with a number of celebrity clients. She is the daughter of Bernardine Coverley and artist Lucian Freud and great granddaughter of the inventor of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud. Her only full sibling is her sister, writer Esther Freud, who wrote the memoir of their hippie childhood in Morocco, Hideous Kinky. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bella_Freud


Esther Freud (born 2 May 1963) is a British novelist. Born in London, Freud is the daughter of painter Lucian Freud and Bernadine Coverley. She is also a great-granddaughter of Sigmund Freud and niece of Clement Freud. Freud has a sister, fashion designer Bella Freud, and a half-brother, Noah Woodman. Her uncle was the late politician Sir Clement Freud. She has two cousins in the media; Matthew and broadcaster Emma. She is married to actor David Morrissey, with whom she has three children, and maintains homes in London and Southwold. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Freud




Anton Walter Freud (3 April 1921 in Vienna, Austria – 8 February 2004, Oxted, England), grandson of Sigismund Schlomo Freud, was a chemical engineer and a member of the Royal Pioneer Corps and the British Special Operations Executive. He was the first child of Sigmund Freud’s eldest son Jean-Martin (Martin), a lawyer, and his wife Ernestine Drucker. He was named after Anton von Freund, a colleague of his grandfather. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Freud


David Anthony Freud, Baron Freud (born 24 June 1950) is a British journalist, businessman, Conservative politician and welfare adviser and is a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. He is a great grandson of Sigmund Freud, and son of Annette Krarup and Anton Walter Freud. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Freud,_Baron_Freud



Anna Freud, daughter of Sigmund (3 December 1895 – 9 October 1982), psychoanalist, co-founder of psychoanalytic child psychology en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Freud
.

Those who are interested in this topic will have noticed that there are multiple opinions to be found on this topic on the web, those who are not interested won't of course




I gladly invite those who already did some research of their own to contribute to this topic.

I personally think Freudian psycho is one of the most profitable and underestimated brainwashing techniques still used on ignorant victims, promoted for good reasons by the currently prevailing system.

.

Well Brand (as usual) is bringing nothing new to the table: Freud has long since been debunked. As well as being morbidly obsessed with the sexuality of humans of all ages, he was also a morphine and cocaine addict. I'm not sure how reliable this link is - but there arte plenty out there revealing the same facts. On top of everything else, Freud was a junkie!

historyhouse.com/in_history/cocaine/

He may well be considered debunked but sadly the damage has been done and continues to be done as a result of his influence. I think there is a lot of evidence to support his drug taking habits.

Debunking Freud Part 1- Unconscious Homosexuality


This article is one of the many articles that will focus on exposing some of the fallacies in Freud’s theoretical make-up. I shall try as much as possible not to bring any ad hominem attacks against Freud and delineate the difference between his opinion as part of a theory and his opinion as part of his personal belief system, even though there is considerable overlap between the two:)





Unconcious Homosexuality

Martin, although a relatively affluent person who has had a great deal of accomplishments in his life, felt that his existence was not worth all the material belongings he bought over the years, and that his relationships with other people, which he considered less fulfilling because they were based on collegiality and not on affinity, brought him no pleasure. In order to ease this gradual downturn in his life, Martin decided to seek the help of a psychoanalyst.

Over the course of several weeks Martin shared his life story with his therapist. Eventually the relationship between him and the therapist progressed to the level where Martin had absolutely no restraints in telling and retelling some of the worries that continuously vexed him. After a month or two of treatment, when the sufferer-healer relationship was well established, the psychoanalyst decided to probe Martin about his sexual behavior. Martin, lying on the soft, therapeutic couch, who now fully trusted the bespectacled person behind him, told everything he knew, as candidly as one possibly could do:

“I had a great deal of women in my life. Some of them have kindled some interest in me, but for the most part the attraction was sexual. There was a time, when I was in my 20s, that I wouldn’t spend one night without a woman in bed. Quite frankly, I felt a lot of pleasure from these encounters, and did not have second-thoughts about experimenting when it comes to sex. Even now I am sexually very healthy.”

While Martin tells his account, the session is suddenly interrupted by the practitioner’s secretary. Apparently, against all conventions, the healer has to leave the room to attend to some important matter. Martin, bored, notices that the therapist left his notes behind. Unable to restrain his curiosity, he picks up the notebook filled with scribbles and leafs to the last page. He reads:

“Possibility of unconscious homosexuality.“

After the therapist comes back, Martin indignantly throws the notebook in his face. “I am not gay!”…. While he slams the door, the psychoanalyst picks up the notebook and writes this final note:

“unconscious homosexuality in the patient confirmed.“

—

The account above, although fictional, reveals through the psychoanalyst’s behavior Freud’s reaction towards repressing homosexual drives. According to Freud, when a patient experiences a very intense heterosexual life, it can be argued that this intensity helps repress unconscious homosexuality. Moreover, if you as an individual do not experience even a slight attraction to other persons of the same-sex, then this complete absence of attraction is another proof that you are unconsciously repressing your homosexuality. The problem with this explanation is that it is unfalsifiable. If Martin would argue with his therapist and continue to defend his heterosexuality, then the rejoinder from Freud would be that Martin is rationalizing and is further repressing his homosexual drives. So, Martin is left with the choice of denying his sexual attraction to other men and thus proving that the therapist is right or with accepting his homosexuality and again validating Freud’s claims. No win-win game here.

Additionally, Freud believed that this unconscious homosexuality comes to surface in subtle ways. For example, if a man praises another man’s suit, then this could be evidence of unconscious homosexuality. Also, if a man likes to spend his time in the company of other men in a non-sexual way, then we have more evidence of repressed homosexual penchants. On this theoretical framework, Freud at one point considered that monks are particularly prone to unconscious homosexuality.

Gay Reichs (reich means rich in German)

In the next post we will review Freud’s personal views about homosexuality and the evidence related to the theoretical view that support/falsify Freud’s claims about the origins of homosexuality.

References

Freud, S. (1962). The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud. Vol 3. J. Strachey, (Ed.). London: Hogarth.

______ (1964). Leonardo da Vinci and a memory of his childhood. New York: Norton.

Fromm, E. (1980) Greatness and limitations of Freud’s thought. New York: Harper & Row Publishers. {The book was originally published in Germany under the title Sigmund Freud Psychoanalyse–Grosse und Grezen}

raverat.wordpress.com/2010/08/28/debunking-freud-part-1-unconscious-homosexuality/

Found this:


The "normal" man is also insane, but insane within the boundaries, the accepted boundaries of the society, of the culture.

Somebody sometimes trespasses, goes beyond the boundaries -- then he becomes ill. Then the whole society, which is ill, says that this man is ill. And the psychiatrist exists on the boundary to help this man back, back to the crowd.

The psychiatrist cannot be the master, because he himself is not whole. And the patient cannot be the disciple, because he has not come to learn. He is disturbed, and he does not want to be disturbed; his effort is only for adjustment, not for health. The psychiatrist cannot be the master, although in the West he is pretending to be, and sooner or later he will pretend that he is the master in the East too. But he cannot be -- he himself is ill. He may help others to be adjusted, and that's okay: one ill man can help another ill man, in some ways. But one ill man cannot bring another man who is ill to be whole; one madman cannot help another madman to go beyond madness.

Even your Freuds, your Jungs, your Adlers, are absolutely ill; not only ordinary psychiatrists, but the greatest of them are ill and pathological. I will tell you a few things so you can feel it. Whenever somebody mentioned anything about death, Freud would start trembling. Twice he even fainted and fell down from his chair just because somebody was talking about mummies in Egypt. He fainted! And another time also, Jung was talking about death, corpses, and suddenly Freud trembled and fell down, fainted, became unconscious. If death was such a fear to Freud, what about his disciples?

And why should death be such a fear?

Can you conceive of a Buddha being afraid of death? Then he would no longer be a Buddha.

Jung has reported that many times he wanted to go to Rome to visit the Vatican and particularly the library, the Vatican's library, which is the greatest, which has the most secret records of all the religions that have existed -- very rare. But whenever he went to purchase the ticket he would start trembling -- just going to Rome! What will happen when you go to moksha? He would cancel the ticket and come back. He never went, never. Many times he tried, and in the end he decided: "No, I cannot go."

What is the fear, going to Rome? Why is a psychiatrist afraid of going to religion? Because Rome is just the symbol, the representative. And this Jung had created a philosophy around his mind, and that philosophy was afraid of being shattered. It is just as if a camel is afraid to go to the Himalayas, because when a camel comes near the Himalayas, for the first time he comes to know that he is nothing. This whole philosophy that Jung has created is just childish. Man has created such vast, cosmic systems, and all those systems are in ruins now. The fear is that going to Rome means going to the ruins of the great systems that the past has created.

What about your small system? What about this small corner that you have cleaned and decorated? What about your philosophy?

Great philosophies have tumbled down and gone to dust: go to Rome, see what has happened! Go to Athens, see what has happened! Where are the schools of Aristotle and Plato and Socrates? All have disappeared into dust. The greatest systems in the end come to dust; all thoughts finally prove to be useless, because thought is just a man-created thing.


The same thing happened to Freud many times. He also tried to go to Rome -- so it does not seem to be just a coincidence -- and he also was afraid. Why? Freud was as angry as you can be, Freud was as sexual as you can be, as scared of death as you can be, as neurotic in his behavior as you can be, so what is the difference? He may have been a more intelligent man, may have been a genius perhaps, or he could help a little, but he was as blind as you are as far as the ultimate is concerned, as far as the secretmost, innermost core of being is concerned.

Osho, The Mustard Seed

Osho was a wise man - basically - and a truth loving human ... who made a fortune from speaking the truth and helping humans to free themselves (he was not responsible for them creating just new programmes or new matrixes from what he said) ...





no more, no less.

At least he helped some of them to have fun - which is by far much more than Freud (Joy) ever did!
.

Sigismund Schlomo Freud


"I am actually not at all a man of science, not an observer, not an experimenter, not a thinker. I am by temperament nothing but a conquistador--an adventurer, if you want it translated--with all the curiosity, daring, and tenacity characteristic of a man of this sort"

- Sigismund Schlomo Freud aka Sigmund Freud, letter to Wilhelm Fliess, Feb. 1, 1900



Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) is considered the father of psychoanalysis, which may be the granddaddy of all pseudoscientific psychotherapies, second only to Scientology as the champion purveyor of false and misleading claims about the mind, mental health, and mental illness. For example, in psychoanalysis schizophrenia and depression are not brain disorders, but narcissistic disorders. Autism and other brain disorders are not brain problems but mothering problems. These illnesses do not require pharmacological or behavioral treatment. They require only "talk" therapy. Similar positions are taken for anorexia nervosa and Tourette's syndrome (Hines 1990: 136). What is the scientific evidence for the psychoanalytic view of these mental illnesses and their proper treatment? There is none.


Read more skepdic.com/psychoan.html

as a by thought -

Frog wrote:
Well said.

The historical context is everything,which shoots down the post on Kinsey and Skinner.Their road was paved for them by Freud,Jung and earlier---Darwin.
With the perverted foundation laid,it paved the way for Bernays and others to manipulate the masses with culture creation and predictive programming.And as decadeds passed those perverted views became the norm,and traditional views on morality scoffed at by mindc-ontrolled masses.The lies are reinfoced by establishment media and educators.

zax wrote:




It's all tightly interwoven

- communism
- bolshevism
- cultural marxism
- tavistock
- mk ultra
- sexualization / pornographization / peodophilization of the masses ....


When did this start and who started it?



truth-zone.net/forum/history/63339-historic-origins-of-paedophilia-child-rape.html
truth-zone.net/forum/history/63649-the-sexual-decadence-of-weimar-germany.html
truth-zone.net/forum/government-and-authority/62185-tavistock-brainwashing-the-world-to-death.html
truth-zone.net/forum/government-and-authority/62288-early-sexualization-kinsey-paedophile-porn-agenda.html

PFIZIPFEI wrote:
No one gets paid for telling the truth...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Freudian_Coverup

Now let's see, why would he do that.....

PFIZIPFEI wrote:
So he's being 'debunked' because he's a Jew?

I don't think he will be debunked, some aspects will be more accurate than others and they will be debunked by progressive science, by use of experiment and information gathering.

I don't see how a handful of anti semites posting on a forum will have gathered by experience information to debunk Freud.

It's more a case of Googling anti Freud blogs etc.. And posting them up.

Freud was the director at 'Tavistock institute where many of the social engineering methods used, & mind control etc... Are said to be based on Freud's work.


Perhaps once you've completely read & understood this work, then come up with your own experiments and information gathered from assessing psychology on these different levels you'd then be in a position to commence a genuine debunk.