It always gives me a boost when I see an upload from you. Thank you.

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you

@Vdor

4 жыл бұрын

Hashim Malik echo that !

What I have heard in the first part was perfect; clear and understandable. Thanks.

A cat captures a mouse and bats it around, lets it run free, captures it again and appears to “torture“ it. But if you take away the mouse and substitute a rolled up bit of paper the cat will do the same thing..

Very interesting and gripping presentation, thank you. Thank God for psychoanalysis and other therapies which allow the opening up of thinking and the opening out of the hitherto 'hidden'. And how very interesting to hear of the various theorists' ideas from a more neutral observational place, rather than from a dogmatic or cult sort of place. Looking forward already to Part 2! Thank you.

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Welcome

Great lecture as usual. Thank you

Thanks for being Don. You make the world a better place.

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Brilliant! This gave me so much food for thought. Thank you.

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you, I’m glad.

I can’t express. There is so much wisdom in this lecture video, if wisdom as such ever exists.

@doncarveth

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you.

Thanks a lot for such a great lecture!

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Most welcome

great as usual

Really great lecture. I'm interested in the juxtaposition between attachment security (Bowlby) and what we (western culture) often long for in our sexual relationships. Relational security = steadiness, predictability, stability, loving connection ; Sexuality = spontaneity, unpredictability, "naughtiness", finding a partner in crime to engage one's kinks. It seems that one must have a very secure and trusting relationship with their partner in order to effectively achieve/gratify their sexual desires. Thanks again for all that you do. Ryan

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, exactly. Often the need for security overpowers the sexuality. Being able to find that balance is not easy. I hope we can address this issue in Port to before too long. Thanks

I'm really glad that I found your channel. Hello, from Perth, Ontario

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Welcome Susan. Perth, lovely town.

@judithbreastsler

4 жыл бұрын

@@doncarveth Perth has its charms----not the easiest town to be a school teacher though. Glad to be a retiree!

Very good

I always look forward to your videos, thank you so much! I have one comment regarding Freud's theory and your disagreement on sexuality. I think Freud started talking about the body in his first theory on instincts referring to sexual drives and self-preservation drives. Later on, he clearly explained that the instincts are transformed into drives (eros and thanatos) which actually means that they still start from the body, the difference is that they are not instincts but drives. So, I don;t see where your argument is based on. Even if the mind mediates during the 2nd year of life, drives are still, transformed/socialized instincts, which initially have been bubbled up from the body. As an example of that, the infant sucks the breast because of the need of hunger (necessity), later on he sucks his thumb because of pleasure. That doesn't change the fact that the mechanism is still starting from the body. In addition, when we see patients in regression, we can observe the appearance of instincts in dreams (fire, killing sprees, thunderstrucks etc) which are discharged into the body and we can observe the instincts in real life (e.g. a patient feels like he's having a fever whenever experiences separation or when he approaches a woman). That confirms Freud's theory that all starts from the body, even if we develop later on the capacity to symbolize and think.

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

I agree that in the beginning is the body. But I think you radically underestimate the transformative significance of symbolization.

Thanks Don, loving it :-) I would really appreciate a couple of references to mainstream psychoanalytic papers that outline your position, challenging Freud's biological/animalistic "trickle up" drives theory. Your argument so resonates with my own experiences , particularly in the erotic transference/countertransference dynamic. I'm in the middle of putting together a case study and would really appreciate some papers to read/reference.

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

See references in: www.yorku.ca/dcarveth/Perversion.pdf

@carlt570

4 жыл бұрын

@@doncarveth Thank you

Don could you talk about impotence and the challenges to creatively generating intimacy?

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

I will try to address these topics in Port to

Thank you a lot for this ... many subjects are now clear to me... I mean, the question of pleasure in sex be linked to dirty and unacceptable to superego behavior...

@doncarveth

4 жыл бұрын

Good!

Don, if I may, a three-part question: A) What does trauma do to the phases of development? B) Consider the previous question with the addition of the cause of the trauma being one of the parents of the child. What if both parents were the cause? C) Also, what would the effect of the trauma be if it would occur in different ages of the child, i.e. infancy, teenage, adulthood? Thanks in advance.

@doncarveth

3 жыл бұрын

Too complex to answer here. There are books addressing these questions. You will need to do some research.

Dear Mr. Carveth. Would you please prepare a video for perversion? Thank you very much.

@doncarveth

3 жыл бұрын

It is there already: sexuality part two

@Istrice963

3 жыл бұрын

Don Carveth thank you. I noticed that. Great lecture.

I’m interested in words and found the word Compersion. Compersion is a word that means "to take joy from another person's joy." It's often used among consensually nonmonogamous people as a reason some folks enjoy "sharing" their partner, or something they learn to appreciate along the way to help them battle potential jealousy. To put it simply, some people enjoy cuckolding because they take pleasure (pleasure principle at work) in their partner being pleasured. I know this is only factor in cuckolding and the humiliation seems to be the main kink at work in accounting for this perversion

@doncarveth

3 жыл бұрын

Two types, one definitely masochistic, the other is a disguised form of mastery. For Benvenuto “perversion“ is sometimes an art form.

I don't agree that sexuality (of sophisticated animals like humans) comes from the higher mind. My 90y grandmother on her deathbed was delusional, and wanted to to have sex because there was a man in her room. That man was her child (my dad) but she stopped recognizing him. Yes sexuality is sophisticated because we have a sophisticated society. So if we see society likes crying women in red leather jackets, we get attracted to this ..because of this instinct to live on (have children with even higher chances of mating than us). In fact, I consider beauty, even the beauty of art, as a byproduct of mating. We are attracted to a good song, like we want to mate with its creator, and snobbery also shows we associate ourselves with certain art to make ourselves more interesting/appealing. A bug may be as healthy as lion, but in our society we associate bugs with uncleanliness/poorness so its an undesirable/ugly association.

Thank you I will watch this later, recently read Freud's seminal work, his own pathology? All the great or ancient spiritual-metaphysical texts get around this "sex" craving, desire as being part of a regression animalist psychic mode, natural but potentially unnatural ie addictive, powerful, overwhelming taking us over re very early orgiastic cults pre date Christianity. 7 minutes in lot of assumptions there Don , then moving onto Cain, who out of jealousy /envy murdered a very good reason to feel anxious, further back the 2 years old as if an explicit starting point, it I feel is inherent in the mental-physiological makeup of homo sapiens, it forms then more firmaly upon symbolization and then linguistic forms -signifiers and then the definitive existential position you refer to is taken up , which I feel is a defence against primary anxiety and deeper level fear of splitting from early trauma, that is the so-called existential phase is not what it appears. But ..Will listen to rest later. yep pretty much agree 9 mins in .

I think destructiveness is a product of humans being in non-stop mating season. You give a machine-gun (and ability to use it) to a male lion/wolf during mating season and lets see if he'll use it. Of course he will. In nature the alpha male mates exclusively with ALL the females (reminds me of Genghis Khan having much of Asia as his descendents), most males never mate. So, animals grab as much power as they can (that's the whole point of natural selection). Humans are just very good/smart at this, that's why we're so destructive. (its not because we stopped being natural, its because we're still natural, but with excessive capabilities/power).

@doncarveth

2 жыл бұрын

But some folks manage to rise above “nature”

@ubuntuposix

2 жыл бұрын

@@doncarveth Yes, some rise above "nature", that's the uniqueness of humans (identify with others instead of identifying with our genes). But you said 15:20 "Human destructiveness cannot be reduced to biological, its uniquely human". So overall you're suggesting that these folks which rise above "nature" are the destructive ones, while I argue they are the least destructive. In fact the less people are engaged in biological pleasures, the more they lack libido/drive of living, vigorousity, and fall under depression. In a way, depression is inactivity (due to a lack of solutions). Having too much awareness (which is possible when our "nature" is kept low) leads to seeing mutually conflicting ideas, and thus indecisiveness and inaction. Impotence can also have cause in too much rationalization. In (my) conclusion. The ones rising above nature are the least destructive, and vice-versa. Yes humans are complex animals, Hitler didn't impregnate all the females he saw, but his desire to eliminate non-Germans ("pure Aryans") its still a natural quest (of eliminating foreign/competitor genes), its the same tribalism those extremely cruel monkeys have.

@wavy6470

Жыл бұрын

Not all animals have that kind of societal structure.