Subject Some reflections
Posted by Julie_Cheng
Posted on Mon Mar 27 23:54:02 2000
From IP  

Freud certainly raises many issues and innovative views that offer people to debate with. I¡¦m especially appealed by his idea of the ¡§repetition compulsion.¡¨ Although I cannot fully agree with his argument, but examples he offers are quite interesting. But can we sort the same event that happen on us several or many times as a result of the ¡§repetition compulsion¡¨? We are the ¡§result¡¨ or the ¡§recipient,¡¨ not the cause or doer, so how can it be the fruit of our instinct of repetition? I think this impulse is about the one who causes or does it instead of the one who is affected by it. If the repetition has nothing to do with a person¡¦s characteristics or traits, and then, the repetitive events or scenes can be counted as ¡§uncanny.¡¨ I think people can feel better if happenings of all tragedies are simply ¡§uncanny¡¨ instead of seemingly asinine repetitions. As what Freud claims, all of us are heading to the ¡§old goal¡¨: death.
Besides death, human beings also tend to stick to what is familiar to them. So I think our drive to the primary ways also associates with some kind of fixation, to assure our security. We are most unlikely to fail when we do one thing in the same way. If we do not do it perfectly, at least we can expect that beforehand because we already know the outcome before we do it. With the knowledge acquired in my undergraduate studies in social work, I learned that fixation is a great obstacle that need to be removed if we want our clients (in social work field, patients are the service buyer or receivers) make some essential change. That is really beyond the pleasure principle. Patients are hurt in certain relationship but they are afraid to step out and make some changes. Pleasure is not their main concern, but the sense of security in a certain formed organic system. What appears so painful to us is quite bearable or common to them.
We might become frantic and argumentative when Freud proposes that the ¡§development of man up to now does not seem . . . differing from that of animal development¡¨ (Rickman 163). This claim is sophisticated. Human beings are on the top of all creatures, so can we be rated at the same level with other animals? But it is true that our sexuality and instinct of death do not differ to that of animals¡¦. However, what make humans different to other creatures is not in this aspect. In my opinion, it should be viewed in the intellectual aspect. However, Freud provides an interesting way to look at the evolution. We should not overestimate our superiority to animals.
Freud treats ¡§transference¡¨ as a technique to ¡§dig out¡¨ the past of neurotic patients; I was quite surprised when I read about it. It seems against what I have learned. A social worker or a practitioner should avoid ¡§transference,¡¨ no matter it is positive transference or negative transference. A meeting or a therapeutic session can fail by the ¡§transference.¡¨ Maybe my knowledge is not altogether correct. At any rate, I admire Freud¡¦s theories although I cannot really understand them.

HOME PAGE             Contact Me
Forums Powered By
WWWThreads Version 2.7.3