Freud's defence mechanisms and TW

[gerry456]

There appears to be no difference between the assimilation/disintegration of Freud's defence mechanisms and finding one's True Will. You have Reality and you have the mind's capacity to run from pain (i.e. distortion of Reality). One path leads to happiness and the other one doesn't.

The categorization of these mechanisms can be extensive but for a brief overview check this American educational movie on defense mechanism (those who were kicked out of their school sports team brace thyselves) ;


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhCo5WJ ... Wiaw_mX2-A

Additional reading you may find interesting; http://thelema-and-skepticism.blogspot. ... -7-10.html

[gerry456]

No takers here.

[Hermitas]

You gonna curse me if you get {******} off?

[Avshalom Binyamin]

No takers here.

Did you have a question?

[gerry456]

You gonna curse me if you get {******} off?

I don't get it.

[gerry456]

No takers here.

Did you have a question?

Well yeah, do you agree or disagree with the OP? If not then why not? Bear in mind that defence mechanisms are about lying to ourselves about what caused/causes unbearable pain and note how this theme of lying to oneself is in the following verses of AL;

2 21
2 22
2 32
2 52
2 54

Furthermore do you see any exercises of Thelema that act as a breaking down of our defence mechanisms?

[Avshalom Binyamin]

Well yeah, do you agree or disagree with the OP?

About which point? You said a lot of things and posted a lot of links.

[gerry456]

Well yeah, do you agree or disagree with the OP?

About which point? You said a lot of things and posted a lot of links.

There appears to be no difference between the assimilation/disintegration of Freud's defence mechanisms and finding one's True Will. You have Reality and you have the mind's capacity to run from pain (i.e. distortion of Reality). One path leads to happiness and the other one doesn't. Do you disagree?

[Avshalom Binyamin]

There appears to be no difference between the assimilation/disintegration of Freud's defence mechanisms and finding one's True Will.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Can you rephrase?

Do you mean that letting go of one's psychological defense mechanisms is the same thing as finding one's True Will? If that's what you're asking, then no, I don't agree that they're the same thing. How do they appear the same to you?

You have Reality and you have the mind's capacity to run from pain (i.e. distortion of Reality). One path leads to happiness and the other one doesn't.

Are you saying that reality leads to happiness and running from pain is a distortion of reality that doesn't lead to happiness? If that's what you're saying, I'd agree with the second part, and would ask you to rephrase to help me understand what you're trying to communicate.

[gerry456]

Fair enough. Running from reality involvess a process of lying to Self. The inner self ie the HGA beyond the veil of distortions. AC spoke directly about the"fancy ideas" we have about ourselves and how magical practice shows us that we cannot run from ourselves for we are "always there". The following passages are from MITAP in which AC states that magical practices do break down (in today's lingo) defence mechanisms but he thinks that Freud denied the Star within each individual.

The sincere student will discover, behind the symbolic technicalities of his book, a practical method of making himself a Magician. The processes described will enable him to discriminate between what he actually is, and what he has fondly imagined himself to be.

Professor Sigmund Freud and his school have, in recent years, discovered a part of this body of Truth, which has been taught for many centuries in the Sanctuaries of Initiation. But failure to grasp the fullness of Truth, especially that implied in my Sixth Theorem ("Every man and every woman is a star". That is to say, every human being is intrinsically an independent individual with his own proper character and proper motion) and its corollaries, has led him and his followers into the error of admitting that the avowedly suicidal "Censor" is the proper arbiter of conduct. Official psycho-analysis is therefore committed to upholding a fraud, although the foundation of the science was the observation of the disastrous effects on the individual of being false to his Unconscious Self, whose "writing on the wall" in dream language is the record of the sum of the essential tendencies of the true nature of the individual. The result has been that psycho-analysts have misinterpreted life, and announced the absurdity that every human being is essentially an anti-social, criminal, and insane animal. It is evident that the errors of the Unconscious of which the psycho-analysts complain are neither more nor less than the"original sin" of the theologians whom they despise so heartily.


He must behold his soul in all its awful nakedness, he must not fear to look on that appalling actuality. He must discard the gaudy garments with which his shame has screened him; he must accept the fact that nothing can make him anything but what he is. He may lie to himself, drug himself, hide himself; but he is always there. Magick will teach him that his mind is playing him traitor. It is as if a man were told that tailors' fashion-plates were the canon of human beauty, so that he tried to make himself formless and featureless like them, and shuddered with horror at the idea of Holbein making a portrait of him. Magick will show him the beauty and majesty of the self which he has tried to suppress and disguise.

I'l admit I am not sure if AC gets this right about Freud i.e. particularly the The result has been that psycho-analysts have misinterpreted life, and announced the absurdity that every human being is essentially an anti-social, criminal, and insane animal. It is evident that the errors of the Unconscious of which the psycho-analysts complain are neither more nor less than the"original sin" of the theologians whom they despise so heartily.
bit. It may be sour grapes on AC's part as Freud outlined the higher defence mechanisms of sublimation which created civil-ization. AC stating that "errors of the Unconscious" are xtinaity's Original Sin. What errors?

[Hermitas]

I'm torn. I kinda want to have this discussion just to try to break the silence, but I actually just mostly agree.

The strange bit is Crowley's characterization of of psychoanalysts and their thought. It's kind of limited, but he does say "Freud and his school," so... I'm not really a fan of them anyway.

[gerry456]

I'm torn. I kinda want to have this discussion just to try to break the silence, but I actually just mostly agree.

The strange bit is Crowley's characterization of of psychoanalysts and their thought. It's kind of limited, but he does say "Freud and his school," so... I'm not really a fan of them anyway.

He wrote all that when psychoanalysis was in it's infancy. He and society had limited understanding of the full implications of it. His critique about the censor as the arbiter sounds like BS, it's woolly imo. Today psychotherapy is an established science, things have changed, immensely.

[Avshalom Binyamin]

Sure, but the point still stands that psychoanalysis is still focused on pathology, not health. Most psychology is (at least practically speaking, because that's what our medical billing system requires), but psychoanalysis more so than, say, CBT.

The getting over psychological defense mechanisms bit is helpful, but some of that may never go away, even for someone who has attained significantly. It really depends.

What matters the most (science says) in terms of progress in therapy is the authentic professional connection between the client and therapist. And that's built on "unconditional positive regard" from the therapist. In short, having the therapist really believe in your essential goodness makes a huge difference. That's not really emphasized much in psychoanalysis, from my limited understanding and experience.

[gerry456]

Sure, but the point still stands that psychoanalysis is still focused on pathology, not health. Most psychology is (at least practically speaking, because that's what our medical billing system requires), but psychoanalysis more so than, say, CBT.

The getting over psychological defense mechanisms bit is helpful, but some of that may never go away, even for someone who has attained significantly. It really depends.

What matters the most (science says) in terms of progress in therapy is the authentic professional connection between the client and therapist. And that's built on "unconditional positive regard" from the therapist. In short, having the therapist really believe in your essential goodness makes a huge difference. That's not really emphasized much in psychoanalysis, from my limited understanding and experience.

The brain of the baby may be literally stunted if emotional needs are not met. Sure, pathological and neurotic defence mechanisms never go away, they are entrenched within the brain but you have a negative view on therapy. The adult brain can still grow and new neural pathways can develop. The aim of therapy is to get the patient/client to replace the engrained patterns with higher forms of defence mechanisms that override the damage.

[Avshalom Binyamin]

The brain of the baby may be literally stunted if emotional needs are not met. Sure, pathological and neurotic defence mechanisms never go away, they are entrenched within the brain but you have a negative view on therapy. The adult brain can still grow and new neural pathways can develop. The aim of therapy is to get the patient/client to replace the engrained patterns with higher forms of defence mechanisms that override the damage.

No, I don't have a negative view of therapy. I have a negative view of Freudian psychoanalysis. It's a century old and has been supplanted by much better therapy.

[Anchorite]

The brain of the baby may be literally stunted if emotional needs are not met. Sure, pathological and neurotic defence mechanisms never go away, they are entrenched within the brain but you have a negative view on therapy. The adult brain can still grow and new neural pathways can develop. The aim of therapy is to get the patient/client to replace the engrained patterns with higher forms of defence mechanisms that override the damage.

No, I don't have a negative view of therapy. I have a negative view of Freudian psychoanalysis. It's a century old and has been supplanted by much better therapy.

I've got a negative view of therapy as I've been in varying kinds for years and not one helped one bit.
Maybe if I was a millionaire I could afford to have a stylish nervous breakdown somewhere warm with some tropical based Jungian. But most for most of us the dream of getting better through what's on offer to the truly needy is some kind of Marx bro's comedy watched slo-mo on bad acid. I've had so many friend fall through the cracks and abandoned to die from sucidie or isolation as a result of their 'treatment', absolute broken alcoholics given CBT by people who haven't even got a social worker qualification. I was referred once to a phsyciatrist' after I hadn't slept in 2 weeks who just shouted at me 'I have to work, stop wasting my time and get a job' *and kicked me out* before I had even sat down. At that time I actually had a job too. I was trying to *keep* it. Thanks universe.
The NHS is truly a work of art and I would be absolutely lying if I didn't say I had less than zero respect for the medical profession in this country.
/rant.