|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
Hypnotism is Transference
Wo/man worships and fears power; we enthusiastically give our loyalty to our leader. Sapiens are at heart slavish. Therein lay the rub, as Shakespeare might say. Freud was the first to focus upon the phenomenon of a patient’s inclination to transfer the feelings s/he had toward her parents as a child to the physician. The patient distorts the perception of the physician; s/he enlarges the figure up far out of reason and becomes dependent upon him. In this transference of feeling, which the patient had for his parents, to the physician the grown person displays all the characteristics of the child at heart, a child who distorts reality in order to relieve his helplessness and fears. Freud saw these transference phenomena as the form of human suggestibility that makes the control over another, as displayed by hypnosis, as being possible. Hypnosis seems mysterious and mystifying to us only because we hide our slavish need for authority from our self. We live the big lie, which lay within this need to submit our self slavishly to another, because we want to think of our self as self-determined and independent in judgment and choice. The predisposition to hypnosis is identical to that which gives rise to transference and it is characteristic of all sapiens. We could not function as adults if we retained this submissive attitude to our parents, however, this attitude of submissiveness, as noted by Ferenczi, is “The need to be subject to someone remains; only the part of the father is transferred to teachers, superiors, impressive personalities; the submissive loyalty to rulers that is so widespread is also a transference of this sort.” Freud saw immediately that when caught up in groups wo/man became dependent children once again. They abandoned their individual egos for that of the leader; they identified with their leader and proceeded to function with him as their ideal. Freud identified man, not as a herd animal but as a horde (teeming crowd) animal that is led by a chief. Wo/man has an insatiable need for authority. People have an insatiable need to be hypnotized by authority; they seek a magical protection as when they were infants protected by their mother. This is the force that acts to hold groups together, intertwined within a mutually constructed but often mindless interdependence. This mindless group think also builds a feeling of potency. The members feel a sense of unity within the grasp of their leadership. ‘Why are groups so blind and stupid?’ Freud asked; and he replied that mankind lived by self delusion. They “constantly give what is unreal precedence over what is real.” The real world is too frightening to behold; delusion changes this by making sapiens seem important. This explains the terrible sadism we see in group activity. Questions for discussion Is there a vital difference between human sciences (such as psychology) and natural sciences (such as physics)? Is it possible for humans to create a virtual world that is more important than the real world? What is the difference between a virtual world and the real world? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3
|
there has been many discussions on wether or not Humans create a virtual world. There might be a difference between psychology and the hard sciences - after all Pschology was disregarded in its infancy and it is very hard to measure certain responces, for example IQ and DID (multiple personality disorder)
Im my opinion, humans do create a virtual world, In the cosmological arument Hume ( i think) stated that humans try to create order out of chaos, so perception itself is flawed. if there is a virtual world therefore we must not know of the real world or it must be hard for us to differentiate between the two. In some cases people create a "virtual world" ( if we are considering this "world" at the world of reality) to escape from unpleasant or boring situations, we have all experienced daydreaming. Our perception comes somewhat from all the concouises so could our subconsious mind have a perception of a world we do not know of? Philosophers like Plato thought that there were more than one world. and often valued the other above this one ( reality, or in the case of plato the world of forms) what is to say that just because we don't feel to experience them that they don't exist. I hope this is sorta what you were getting at? and sorry for the bad spelling. Last edited by loukata; 03-17-2007 at 03:46 PM.. Reason: spelling |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
|
loukata
If we try to think about a virtual world I think we must start with a natural world so that we have a starting point, something with which we can compare. What is a natural world? Is it what we ‘see’? Is it the ‘thing-in-itself that Kant tells us about? Depending upon which is a natural world I think we can begin to realize that the world we live in is a virtual world. We are creatures who create symbolic worlds that are more important to us than the world we ‘see’. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|