David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethical Perspectives 5 (3):200-209 (1998)
In this paper I will alternate between the position of a psychoanalyst who reflects on psychoanalysis as a moral philosopher, and that of a psychoanalyst who views moral concepts from an analyst’s point of view. By psychoanalysis I mean the clinical practice and observations deriving from Freud’s ideas and theoretical constructions, as well as the necessary theoretical underpinnings on which it rests.Jungian theory and practice, though inspired by Freud, differ sharply from Freudian theory and practice — as much as Lamarck differs from Darwin. This is why Jung himself referred to his own theory as ‘analytic psychology’. To conflate them under a single category as theologians are sometimes prone to do, even before E. Drewermann, is a misleading therapeutic and scientific ecumenism. In addition, the word ‘sublimation’ occurs extremely rarely in Jung’s works and has little meaning there. The concept has no real place within his theory. While ‘God’, Shiva, Christ, the devil, the holy virgin mother, etc. may be the representative forms of innate archetypes, it is not a sublimation of drives that has raised them to the level of psychological ‘religion’.My decided choice for Freudian theory and practice rests on experience, on epistemological arguments and on philosophical-anthropological convictions. This point of view, however, does not mean that I think one should or can simply repeat Freud’s practical hints and theoretical statements. Precisely because Freud, like Newton and Darwin, was the founder of a new science, his theoretical concepts open up new fields for observation and thought. In this paper, however, I will not carry out any technical exegesis of Freud’s texts and the discussion it has inspired
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Ken Gemes (2009). Freud and Nietzsche on Sublimation. Journal of Nietzsche Studies 38 (1):38-59.
Sandrine Berges (2001). Plato, Nietzsche, and Sublimation. Phronimon 3 (1):1-21.
Clayton Crockett (2008). Inspiration, Sublimation and Speech. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 15 (2):62-71.
Clayton Crockett (2007). Interstices of the Sublime: Theology and Psychoanalytic Theory. Fordham University Press.
W. S. Taylor (1932). Inadequacy of "Sublimation" as a Concept for Ethics. International Journal of Ethics 42 (2):210-212.
Sara Beardsworth (2007). From Nature in Love: The Problem of Subjectivity in Adorno and Freudian Psychoanalysis. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 40 (4):365-387.
Mari Ruti (2012). The Singularity of Being: Lacan and the Immortal Within. Fordham University Press.
Philippe van Haute (1998). About Sublimation. Ethical Perspectives 5 (3):218-224.
A. T. Nuyen (1996). Postmodern Education as Sublimation. Educational Theory 46 (1):93-103.
Rudolf Bernet (1998). Sublimation et symbolisation. Revue Philosophique De Louvain 96 (4):698-709.
Paul Moyaert (2007). Can Sublimation Be Brought About Through Idealization? Ethical Perspectives 14 (1):53-78.
Gregg Horowitz (2004). Sublimation and Disappointment. Southern Journal of Philosophy 42 (S1):137-143.
Gregg Horowitz (2004). Sublimation and Disappointment. Southern Journal of Philosophy 42 (Supplement):137-143.
Volney Gay (1986). Freud, Sublimation, and the Mystery of Transformation. Thought 61 (1):131-149.
Sara Beardsworth (2004). Kristeva's Idea of Sublimation. Southern Journal of Philosophy 42 (S1):122-136.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads5 ( #264,553 of 1,692,206 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #184,284 of 1,692,206 )
How can I increase my downloads?