Why this return to complete Oedipus jo? The psychology is so distant from politics and life, will say. The answer is simple: when Freud posed this problem is really asking for a more fundamental: how the culture reached to dominate men and what methods did you use to achieve it.
The Oedipus complex thus appears then used as a "method ral cultural domination" , and is part of the problem of power in the state achieved its most perfect form of domination, but this is pre- another child, which prepared (1) .
We would therefore draw the general lines of this process of domination, placing the individual genesis of omnipotent mastery over the individual, the internalization absolute power in subjectivity.
In short: the expropriation of the aggressiveness of man as a means of social domination.
Everything is played here from the beginning, the containment of violence is the result of this confrontation that erased the origin, removed its founder arbitrary time from which ignited in us to draw from there initially infinite, beyond time and experience, above and before everything we think, live, remember and speak.
parental complex organization and the fundamental way even children, our adult desires. It is the most naked and simple any confrontation, but at the same time the most dense in its simplicity: the "simple concept" of social domination, lived and raised as a drama, but can also lead to concrete and real. On the three characters-mother, father, son, plans a fourth, implicit and invisible, yet powerful: the limits that mark the social law.
But the Oedipus complex - "dissolved", "liquidated", "destroyed" - it is not a dead cell in an organism that survived. When Freud this is a problem is really asking a more fundamental problem: how "culture" used the power of the very violence of the oppressed to direct it against themselves, and what methods resorted to do: be part of the problem power in the state reaches its most developed form. For Freud the State also continues the complex and able to reserve for itself the exercise of violence, is his privilege, of which emptied others.
This subtle way of excluding early and grab individual violence is part of the child as an end in preparation for the removal of collective aggression that the State uses adult.
We will not explain the historical emergence of the illusory power of the state and its omnipotence. Just try to locate the genesis powerful individual on the individual domain, the internalization of absolute power on subjectivity: the expropriation of the aggressiveness of man as a means of social domination.
| Quote: |
| "What resources appeals to curtail the culture of aggression that is antagonistic to make it harmless and perhaps to eliminate it? We know some of these methods but surely seems to be ignoring the most important. " |
The "method" most important cultural inhibit aggression then turns around a core: strip the man of the force to express their antagonism and their rebellion, disappearing.
But in reality it does not delete: divert its direction. It is not only to prevent their emergence or make it disappear, not that locks securely contained, unenforceable against a counterforce that face the outside world. That aggression, in fact, takes another direction: it is fundamental that, by reversing their movement, assaulted are assaulted himself with his own aggression.
The system used to hold us, our pro pia aggression
We are therefore looking at the home-ground of consciousness from the young adult. And Freud tries to show that in this drama, not accessible to consciousness but that is the most important thing is how to organize the power of our body: what happens to our own aggression.
| Quote: |
| "What has happened to the individual for his aggressive wishes from becoming safe?" |
funny thing, he says, "we never suspected," and proceed as follows:
| Quote: |
| "The aggression is introjected, internalized, returned to where it came from: it is directed against the self, incorporating a part of it, that as a his superego opposed to the remainder, and assuming the role of consciousness unfolds against the same harsh aggressiveness me that I would have gladly paid in foreign individuals " |
.
this opening is important to stress within a field where the relationship of submission, which we put all our passion aggressive and militant, was internalized.
But the subtle complexity of this domain is unexpected and paradoxical effect, because the first fighter unconscious and remain silent.
Only then, and only from there, the father becomes the 'function' abstract consciousness, "pure consciousness" and awareness moral CIA apparently unsubstantiated sensitive structure symbolic function not satisfy us know you are guilty and must atone.
Consciousness, which is defined as a place of rationality, is actually a you sovereignty; of this syllogism that was embodied not know its premises, the iron that kills, iron dies, but his conclusion. And this does not give a rational knowledge but an emotional feeling: the feeling of our hopeless guilt. "Function" symbolic resting on a "tension" sensitive.
| Quote: |
| "The tension created between the harsh super-ego and the self subordinate to the qualify of guilt: he manifests the need for punishment." |
What tense game conscious awareness does not know, and yet it is what is at stake in it. This sense of cultural pa Freud is the name given, because the fault itself is unconscious. Only the judged by their effects, which reveal only the beginning of this new "need" cultural: the search for punishment, in the extension policy is read as a failure and death.
The assault can not then discriminate the real aggressor. Feel guilty for something that really made only in his imagination, feel the need to be punished and thus accepted as a well-deserved any punishment being imposed.
Or we could say, even under the vocation aware of the default search continues darkly unconscious of failure, the only thing that could quiet.
The theoretical description of Freud is the attempt to explain this process, and practice to overcome it.
not say that it must necessarily always be so, and that any confrontation adult is the child of a clash sham that would override the adult sense of rebellion against power. It's just show how deep should the new political task in the same mode of your project and action, try to break up relationships and reconfigure keep her, repeating the muted, as its foundation, the same one to one, the same child unconscious dependence confirms the family drama in the collective organization of its activity.
Rozitchner
Note
1. The boy is hidden role that sexuality meet in your life is not the only criticism that can address today's education. Err, well, not to prepare for the attack, whose purpose is meant to be. When you launch the youth in the midst of life as incorrect orientation, education behaves as if it was endowed with the members of an expedition to the Pole in summer clothing and maps of the lakes of northern Italy. " Sigmund Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents culture in Obras completas, Madrid Biblioteca Nueva, 1973. Volume III, chap. VIII (Luis Lopez taducción Ballesteros) pag.130.
0 comments:
Post a Comment