Introductory lectures on psycho-analysis : $b a course of twenty-eight lectures delivered at the University of ViennaFreud, Sigmund
Science
Introductory lectures on psycho-analysis : $b a course of twenty-eight lectures delivered at the University of Vienna
Freud, Sigmund
Psychoanalysis
Yes, this time you have lighted upon something formidable. I can picture
to myself that unknown speaker; he is probably an assistant of the guest
of honour, perhaps already a junior lecturer himself, a young man with
the brightest prospects. I will press him and ask whether he is sure he
did not perceive some feeling in himself antagonistic to the demand that
he should pay honour to his chief. A nice fuss there is! He becomes
impatient and suddenly bursts out at me: “Look here, enough of this
cross-examination, or I’ll make myself disagreeable! You will ruin my
career with your suspicions. I simply said “_aufstossen_” instead of
“_anstossen_,” because I’d already said “_auf_” twice before it. It’s
the thing that Meringer calls a perseveration, and there’s nothing else
to be read into it. Do you understand me? That’s enough.” H’m, this is a
startling reaction, a truly energetic repudiation. I see that there is
nothing more to be done with the young man, but I think to myself that
he betrays a strong personal interest in making out that his slip has no
meaning. You will perhaps agree too that he has no right to become so
uncivil over a purely theoretical investigation, but after all, you will
think, he must know what he wanted to say and what not.
O, so he must? That is perhaps still open to question.
Now you think you have me in a trap. “So that is your technique,” I hear
you say. “When the person who commits a slip gives an explanation which
fits your views then you declare him to be the final authority on the
subject. He says so himself! But if what he says does not suit your
book, then you suddenly assert that what he says does not count, one
need not believe it.”
Certainly that is so. But I can give you another instance of a similarly
monstrous procedure. When an accused man confesses to a deed the judge
believes him, but when he denies it the judge does not believe him. Were
it otherwise the law could not be administered, and in spite of
occasional miscarriages you will admit that the system, on the whole,
works well.
“Well, but are you a judge, and is the person who commits a slip to be
accused before you? Is a slip of the tongue a crime?”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account