By Lee Nan-hee
Several years ago, once I was very much into psychoanalysis. The father of psychoanalysis is known to be Sigmund Freud. He was a pioneer who navigated an unknown realm of the so-called unconscious. He was a Jew, but he was an atheist. Regarding this aspect, I was very curious ― how could he be an atheist as he was a Jew? Some intriguing facts of Freud's life are as follows. He wanted to become an academic, but he couldn't. That is why and how he began to be a practitioner. He was a poor Jew, discriminated against in Vienna. While he was studying medicine he tried to develop an anesthetic from cocaine but he accidentally killed his friend in his experiment. This incident must have haunted him for his whole life.
In addition, he had to go through severe pain from illness, namely, mouth cancer. He had surgery as much as 32 times. He was to quit smoking due to his illness, but he kept on smoking until he died. Regarding this aspect, I felt that he must not be an ordinary person. He must have been a persistent, obstinate and opinionated person. That is why he could found and establish psychoanalysis in a scientific way.
However, with regard to the psychoanalysis and sexuality of women, Freud has been harshly criticized by many scholars as well as feminist activists. He admitted that women's sexuality and psychoanalysis are like a blank space about which he knew almost nothing. Freud and his thoughts are of course social and cultural constructs of his own time, which were the standard in male-centric Austria, and mainly focused on the high-class women of the 19th century. No thinker or scholar can be perfect in every aspect.
It has become common practice these days for a thinker or a scholar to describe exactly his or her own personal background such as his or her nationality, race, class, religion and sexual orientation. Because no single thinker can explain or assert everything about all people, whose backgrounds and experiences all differ. I think that this practice shows a desirable attitude of a scholar or thinker. Maybe the fact that Freud caused many people to criticize aspects of his work, bringing out issues that were previously hidden, is significant.
Meanwhile, I was quite astonished to find out that there is a movie titled, "Freud," a black-and-white film. It is known that Freud's father was an authoritative figure, and that Freud constructed his theory of the Oedipus complex partly from his own experiences in childhood. His family was neither rich nor affluent. These points are quite impressive to me.
I could feel that Freud was a young and ordinary man who worried about his future, marriage and his family. Before Freud became a full-fledged doctor, there was another genius, Dr. Charcot, in Paris, France who had done experiments with hysteria and hypnosis. Nowadays, more than 200 years later, we can see hypnosis oftentimes in the investigative program titled "Investigating Documentaries" on SBS when police officers and detectives try to disclose some concealed memories of victims and witnesses of crimes.
When Freud worked under Dr. Meiner in a hospital, he had troubles with his boss. When Freud, in his early years of research, gave a lecture or a presentation at a psychology association, it did not get much attraction. Indeed, he was despised by mainstream doctors in Vienna. His theories must have been considered to have focused too much on sexuality, thus making them ignoble and unscientific. His time was a time of science and mechanisms.
Dr. Lee Nan-hee (godorchid@gmail.com) studied English and theology at Hanshin University.
 |
In addition, he had to go through severe pain from illness, namely, mouth cancer. He had surgery as much as 32 times. He was to quit smoking due to his illness, but he kept on smoking until he died. Regarding this aspect, I felt that he must not be an ordinary person. He must have been a persistent, obstinate and opinionated person. That is why he could found and establish psychoanalysis in a scientific way.
However, with regard to the psychoanalysis and sexuality of women, Freud has been harshly criticized by many scholars as well as feminist activists. He admitted that women's sexuality and psychoanalysis are like a blank space about which he knew almost nothing. Freud and his thoughts are of course social and cultural constructs of his own time, which were the standard in male-centric Austria, and mainly focused on the high-class women of the 19th century. No thinker or scholar can be perfect in every aspect.
It has become common practice these days for a thinker or a scholar to describe exactly his or her own personal background such as his or her nationality, race, class, religion and sexual orientation. Because no single thinker can explain or assert everything about all people, whose backgrounds and experiences all differ. I think that this practice shows a desirable attitude of a scholar or thinker. Maybe the fact that Freud caused many people to criticize aspects of his work, bringing out issues that were previously hidden, is significant.
Meanwhile, I was quite astonished to find out that there is a movie titled, "Freud," a black-and-white film. It is known that Freud's father was an authoritative figure, and that Freud constructed his theory of the Oedipus complex partly from his own experiences in childhood. His family was neither rich nor affluent. These points are quite impressive to me.
I could feel that Freud was a young and ordinary man who worried about his future, marriage and his family. Before Freud became a full-fledged doctor, there was another genius, Dr. Charcot, in Paris, France who had done experiments with hysteria and hypnosis. Nowadays, more than 200 years later, we can see hypnosis oftentimes in the investigative program titled "Investigating Documentaries" on SBS when police officers and detectives try to disclose some concealed memories of victims and witnesses of crimes.
When Freud worked under Dr. Meiner in a hospital, he had troubles with his boss. When Freud, in his early years of research, gave a lecture or a presentation at a psychology association, it did not get much attraction. Indeed, he was despised by mainstream doctors in Vienna. His theories must have been considered to have focused too much on sexuality, thus making them ignoble and unscientific. His time was a time of science and mechanisms.
Dr. Lee Nan-hee (godorchid@gmail.com) studied English and theology at Hanshin University.
![[ANALYSIS] Pandemic awakens demand for data-driven automation](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/2b05d621a193420abef7ee24b95eab3d.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
