Freud as Heidegger
September 9th, 2007, search relatedRelated posts :: “We Laughed when they blamed Martin Slybeggar” :: “We laughed when they blamed West” :: “We Laughed when they blamed Martin Slybeggar” :: self and other
Allen just now:
> I was reading a book on memory written by a multi-degreed, much
> decorated neuro-scientist In the process of reviewing basic Freud in
> order to plug the basic Freudian dynamics into his more biological
> view of brain function, he comes out with the following:
>
> “The connection between a slip of the tongue and its cause or between
> a symptom and the underlying cognitive process is obscured by the
> operation of defences –ubiquitous, dynamic, unconscious mental
> processes–resulting in a CONSTANT STRUGGLE BETWEEN SELF REVEALING
> AND SELF-PROTECTIVE MENTAL EVENTS.”
>
> Aletheia as a “mental event.”? Why not? It reflects a long held, but
> little expressed (at least overtly) view of mine that the mental
> dynamics of my own neurotic self can be made relevant to my
> understanding of the work of concealent/unconcealment in the process
> of truth, if those dynamics are care-fully, carefully thought.
Allen, a quick wonder: I wonder about the difference (I perceive) ‘tween
obscuration/protection/hiding and concealing (”the work of concealment”);
for example, in my last statement, although I have so far perhaps obscured
or protected what I mean to say (by not yet explicitly saying, speaking it),
I would not say that I have concealed/hidden/absented it, merely not yet
revealed; more than that, I have begun to point to what is not yet revealed
in what I have revealed (unconcealed) so far. I should like to say that in
protecting/sheltering some thing, the thing might well be obscured/covered
partially or fully by some other thing that is a protecting/sheltering
thing, thus precisely *unconcealing* the protected/sheltered thing in a way
(because protecting things to be protecting things must necessarily be
protecting some other thing of the kind that can be protected by the
protecting thing…). A crypt shelters the encrypted and thereby reveals the
presence of the encrypted. I know, by now, I might well be burying myself in
obscure-rant-isms (so, I’ll shutup) but there’s something there…
regards
michaelP
