Don! You’ve outdone yourself with this video-lecture! Wow! Such a feat to be able to present the project and goals of psychoanalysis in such a clear, succinct way, without compromising complexity!

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you very much, Racquel

Brilliant and lucid as always

Again you amaze me Dr Carveth by explaining so pure and so intresting. You explanation always excite's me🌹🙏 thank you so much

It's not construction of metaphors, but deconstruction of fantasies & literal myths about unconscious elements is the major concern. V well illustrated with clinical examples Sir Carveth. 🤗😘🙏

Excellent. Thank you for this insight.

Great lecture thank you

This is great, I would really enjoy hearing this principle applied to more mundane situations, not the 'superman' example, but eg the reason one might have a self definition that keeps one on the streets, keeps one in constant polar conflict with a family member, keeping one unable to keep their house clean. I would add "etc", but in fact I believe these smaller literalized phantasies are suprisingly few in number. This seems like a very useful concept for people who are not too clinically psychotic to be able to find and deconstruct their remaining delusions. Thank you very much for this concept.

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks. Yes, perhaps I or others will be able to expand the list of illustrations for this wide ranging process.

Hello Dr. Carveth, is there a connection between concrete metaphors in psychotic subjects and sinthomatic compensations in the absence of the Name of Father? Lacan speaks about Joyce and his inscription of Sinthome in the writing process. That, he can keep his borromean rings together through his idiosyncratic relation to language. Is there any therapeutic hope in the metaphorization of psychotic metaphor such that symptom becomes sinthome? That, it might be possible to liberate psychotic metaphor from the constraints of concretion?

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

I hope so, I think there is value in these Lacanian concept. The idea of the symptoms is interesting.. But in reality it is very difficult to help a psychotic person understand their delusion as delusion . The idea of the synth Le is interesting, But in reality these things are very complicated: a person may well be able to deal with metaphor in many areas of their life but there is this one area where everything is quite literal and fundamentalist and concrete.

A lot of information to be eaten in this video this of course a live metaphor😁 thank you for the video appreciate your efforts

I love this video❤

Thank you for another most interesting presentation. At 9:20 you speak of the traditional psychoanalytical conflation of 'drives' as biology rather than as you suggest 'human desires'. How would you frame, or label, the survival/adaptational/evolutionary biology, if not as 'drives'

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

I am sorry to say that I have virtually no interest in either illusionary biology, just as I have no interest in the brain, in so-called Nuro psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis is about the human mind.

@carlt570

2 жыл бұрын

@@doncarveth A most interesting reply, very thought provoking. I'm interested in what you mean in your reply by 'illusionary biology', particularly in the context that you use the term 'biology' in your presentation.

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

@@carlt570 You may not know but I am legally blind and must use voice to text, so I was trying to say evolutionarily

@carlt570

2 жыл бұрын

@@doncarveth Ok, understood. To return to Freud and 'drives'. I would suggest that drives are both biological and human desires, both together and separately. That Freud is correct in that biology, in many circumstances, 'drives' the 'human mind'. You are also correct in that this needs to be seen as not the only way the mind is 'driven'.

Dear Dr Carveth, thank you so much for your lectures. I listened most of them, some of them a few times. I have a question about your lack of interest in neurobiology that you mentioned in an earlier comment. I'm really curious about one, in my opinion, practical aspect. To me, it seems that teaching clients about nervous system and grounding could contribute greatly to therapy/analysis. Grounding helps people to literally direct the blood flow from limbic system (emotional brain) to the cortex, the part of the brain that actually can make sense of therapy/analysis. Do you think this would be a valuable synergy or not? Thank you for your answer in advance!

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

I really have no idea. I suppose it might be useful. But in my view the most useful thing is solid Training in Psychoanalysis. There is no substitute for this.

www.yorku.ca/dcarveth/metaphor.pdf

👌

🎓 👁👁 👃🏻 👄. Really enjoying your videos and as a trainee psychotherapist attempting to formalise my experience as an incidental counselling I believe it’s accelerating my learning and insight beyond my years into myself and others. This concept of personal myth and the clarity of thought around metaphor is invaluable. Thanks again and warm regards to you !

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

Very glad to hear it, thanks