I once read Freud had a reading group on Nietzsches Beyond Good and Evil, yet he dismantled it because he felt like all his ideas were already written down by the man who calls himself dynamite.

I remember Thomas Mann book on the matter titled "Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and Freud" where he drew a straight line debt between all 3 philosophers. Lets not forget that Nietzsche used the term drive (trieb in german) much earlier than psychiatry did. Freuds debt to Nietzsche is really understated. Great audio as always!!

What a great day I've had. This morning I listened to Yepicurus KZfaq video on "Carl Jung's Strangest Law of Shadow Psychology | Enantiodromia Explained" and then this video one of the very best things ever. You do great work. Thank You.

I always thought that one of the main differences between Freud and Nietzsche, was that Nietzsche never spoke of an unconscious, as a noun, or a thing, to my knowledge. He spoke of unconscious impulses, it's an adjective, it's their quality. Nietzsche never unifies the unconscious impulses into a singular psychic domain called "the unconscious". And more so, there's a strength, freedom and fluidity to Nietzsche's art of interpretation that I think is lost in the attempt to create a science of the human psyche.

Finally! Was waiting for the podcast to take its turn towards psychology.

Thank you man,for these well thought and calm pieces. It has been a pleasure

I don’t have much to add, but I really like long discussions about philosophy. Thank you.

Loved this episode! Looking forward to the Jung episode. As an aside, can someone recommend some secondary literature about Freud's theories? I'm working through Nietzsche's backlog and am interested in finding more similarities between the two but don't have enough time to also work through all of Freud's works at the moment.

I have read and seen videos on Freud/ Nietzsche, but none were so eloquent and precise as this video. It gave me pleasure to revise the Id and confront it with the transactional analysis of Eric Burn the”child” and suddenly became a trivial analogy of what I’d represents. I want to add that Carl Jung read Nietzsche and felt that he could not accept his ideas without the risk of making Jung a copycat! ( my interpretation) Freud and Jung had a serious problem of accepting Nietzsche as the First Psychologist.

Thank you for this information. I enjoy reading both Freud and Nietchze !

Even the Freudian, Zizek, denounced Nietzsche in kind. Fools, if you ask me. Yo salts, I’ve been getting into Adlerian psychology. Very deep straightforward knowledge, why don’t you do a video on Adler?

My man!! You're killing it with all these video... I listen to most at least twice!! So it is Freud turn!! I was expecting it sooner or later, with Nietzsche's "philosopher of the future" but I like the turn you take. The thing with Freud is most don't like his ideas, but what's new if you like Nietzsche you are used to this side effect, becoming a main effect.

Salty bro: The expression is 'can't be overstated', as in, no matter how much you talk it up, you won't be overstating it.

Well, his nephew sure had a fair crack at the claim "This century shall be mine". Can we look at the reach of Ed Bernays (on a sociological level) please?

It is always irritating me that the Oedipus complex is named that way since the myth is about the will to explicitely avoid that from happening at all cost and failing. It is the best example of the original meaning of the concept of "tragic" because it is not only despite the attempt to escape this prophecy it comes true, the Tragedy is that by doing so Oedipus is indeed causing the chain of events to unfold that led to his utter disgrace and aubsequential self blinding

Superb analysis of the men.

He said the same lie about reading Schopenhauer.

What irks me a bit about Freud and Carl Jung, is that unlike Nietzsche, they don’t view consciousness and unconsciousness, and the creating of such theories such as consciousness and unconsciousness as body parts, a drive. Nietzsche speaks to me more profoundly than them.

A genuine philosopher ( in the real meaning thereof rather than a " university graduate " ) should not idolise any one , regarding this case I remember reading in one of Freud's ( Or was it Jung ? If so, sorry ! ) writings that he had derived his " subconscious " theory from Schopenhauer .

30:15 this sounds like Aristotles forms of government. This sounds like the Tyranny to Aristocracy phase.

I feel like it's important to place every author in the context of their time when reading them. Except Nietzsche. I never feel like I have to do that with him. It feels like historical context cannot contain his intellect.

Ingenious! I have always assumed that their is many in common between the two, but the fact that Freudian terminology can be traced back to Nietzsche is new. Are you planning to make a special on Nietzsche and the Nazis? I think it would be a good idea, since there are still many misconceptions about them. In short, there are two parties: those who oppose Nietzsche without any consideration, and those who do the opposite because they seen in him someone who glorify force and violence. A fresh third way wouldn't be harmful for us.

Your channel is unfucking believable man. What a blessing

Absolutely, here are 4 more examples across different scientific domains where adopting non-contradictory infinitesimal/monadological frameworks can resolve paradoxes in our current models: 13) Molecular Biology / Origin of Life Contradictory Theories: - Oparin-Haldane primordial soup faced paradox of origin of homochirality - RNA world still has paradox of abiogenesis of first replicators - Contradiction between thermodynamics and information origins Non-Contradictory Possibilities: Infinitesimal Protolife Monadic Transitions dsi/dt = κ Σjk Γijk(ℓ)[sj, sk] + ξi ℓ = f(n1...nm) is monad configuration Modeling molecular origins as monadic infinitesimal protolife transition processes based on catalytic relational term algebras Γijk could resolve paradoxes around homochirality, replication, and aligning thermodynamics/information. 14) Neuroscience / Binding Problem Contradictory Models: - Temporal synchrony doesn't fully determine binding - Spatial EM field theories have intervening causes issues - Symbolic theories face combinatoric roadblocks Non-Contradictory Possibilities: Nonlinear Monadological Multiplex Resonances |Φ> = Σn cn Un(Sα) |0> (superposed resonance states) Wn,m = (monad event coefficient) Modeling binding as nonlinear resonances between multiplexed superpositions of monadic representations Un,Vm over spatiotemporal percept structures Sα 15) Economics / Rationality Paradoxes Contradictory Observations: - Allais paradox, Ellsberg paradox violate expected utility theory - St. Petersburg paradox, Berry paradox defy mathematical rationale - Contradictions between micro/macro economic predictions Non-Contradictory Possibilities: Infinitesimal Monadic Stochastic Choice Pr = Σn pn Un(Ω) (monadic decision weight distribution) U = EY [YΩ] + (1-λ)DY [YΩ] (value function with risk aversion) Using infinitesimal stochastic multiplicities over monadically distributed percept-action mapping Ω and incorporating risk/ambiguity attitudes could resolve paradoxes. 16) Causality / Paradoxes in Spacetime Contradictory Results: - Grandma/Grandchild Paradox with time travel - Uncaused/Trunked Formation of Closed Timelike Curves - Casual Disconnection in Cosmic Inflation Non-Contradictory Possibilities: Relational Pluriverse Geometrodynamics Mμ,ν = Gμν(M) + Λ gμν(M) Geodesic[Mμ,ν](a,b)→Paths[Σnp(n)U(n)p →q U(m)q] Representing causality as paths over pluralistic superpositions of monadic transition amplitudes in relational spacetime geometries could avoid paradoxes. In each case, the classical models face paradoxes, contradictions or inconsistencies due to: - Attempting to derive coherent dynamics from incomplete local rules - Separating physical observations from cognitive/choice phenomena - Requiring strict separability of causal processes and observers The non-contradictory monadological approaches resolve these issues by: - Using holistic infinitesimal interaction rules tied to relational percept/transition structures - Integrating physical and cognitive realms within a unified monadic probability framework - Allowing for fundamentally entangled pluralistic realizations over the geometry itself We see a common pattern - paradoxes emerge from overly reductionist classical assumptions segregating realms that are likely unified at deepest levels of reality. Monadological frameworks restore holistic, relational pluralisms. Whether in biogenesis, neurocognition, decision theory or causality - the new infinitesimal, combinatorial and category-theoretic mathematics of monadological relations is unveiling radically non-reductionist reinstantiations of coherence across our most obstinate paradoxes. By centering relational interaction algebras and embracing irreducible pluralisms, these new model architectures systematically avoid contradictions plaguing classical overly-separable, overly-deterministic theories. We are glimpsing the resolutions that come from realigning symbolic reality-representations with experiential first-person integral structures. The paradox-free future of science may lie in this audacious monadological reinvention - restoring coherent holistic resonance between our descriptive abstractions and the inescapable unified pluriverse reality we fundamentally comprise.

Would love to see Jung to live by on the podcast, would be of immense value.

The content of Nietzsche's philosophy v of Frued's psychological content reveal the abyss between the two men Nietzsche is about glory and victory Frued's is depravity Not unlike Magnus Hirschfeld

Our minds are not our own but the many stages we have traversed upon.

Our mind do not entirely belong to us, but the many stages we have played our parts.

Jane Harrison talks about taboo and custom in her book Themis. She makes the point that the idea of the 'All-powerful' male in the social group relates directly to the father. In other words, in a social group without an incest taboo, the father's 'hareem' is his own wife and daughters. So it relates directly to the Oedipus complex. Unpleasant idea. But perhaps true.

I believe Freuds dream fulfilment has been proved wrong, just look at trauma dreams, it wouldn’t make sense that people would wish to have a trauma repeated. The modern neuroscience looks at it as a show of how one’s life is going as it is so far. What problems are in the mind and how we are either maladaptive in our environment. They are instinctive dreams.

Bit of a trash fire in the comments here that has suprised me, so just wanted to give a hearty thank you. This is definitely worth a few listens.

What about aolomons lesser key then?

Did he saw asmodeus?

I'm really seeing that Freud might not be all that useful in the end.

I was in time out for a minute, and they had all of freuds books, Im guessing donated by a university, tried reading dreams and I thought it was nonsense.

Nietzsche was most definitely in Freud's shadow! One Jung = 100 Freuds.

Its a direct case study into the most physically mystified mind of the times. If you want to see what todays 1900s structural alignment used Neiche & frued are excellent works to reference

I unironically like the clickbait title, because you will gwt more clicks and you deserve them

unconscience is same as libido, sexual impulse, then Freud just give the notion, a name, but the whole idea and thinking comes from Nietzsche....to me Freud is Nietzsche and Schopenhauer all the way down.

Freud was quite an egocentric & arrogant projectionist. Even Carl Jung said that.

I actutlike the idea of victorian repression of sexuality. But they whent too far. They installed weird constructions to prevent them self from doing certain things instead of actually not doing them. I have seen monkeys have sex and it looked very gentle, normal and silent. Victorians should hate one things such as pornography and adultery but not needed things

judean narcissism. they also drown out the genius of C. G. Jung.

00:00 🧠 Freud's insights revolutionized psychology, despite some controversial ideas. 01:09 🌌 Freud's work challenged human narcissism by revealing humanity's place in the universe. 02:03 🔍 Freud introduced the concept of the unconscious mind's influence on behavior. 03:52 📚 Despite Freud's denial, evidence suggests Nietzsche's influence on his work. 05:52 🔄 Freud's originality and Nietzsche's influence can coexist in his work. 06:34 📜 Freud's upbringing, education, and early career shaped his contributions to psychology. 08:09 ⚡ Freud's influential works, such as "Beyond the Pleasure Principle" and "Civilization and Its Discontents," marked milestones in psychology. 09:15 🛏 Freud's exploration of dreams uncovered insights into the unconscious mind. 14:48 💭 Freud posited dreams as expressions of unconscious wishes, revealing deeper aspects of the self. 17:30 🤐 Repression plays a significant role in Freud's theory, influencing the content and interpretation of dreams. 20:12 🏛 Freud's interpretation of his own dreams, like the Oedipus complex, provided insights into universal psychological phenomena. 22:13 🍽 Freud's psychosexual stages include oral, anal, and phallic stages, each associated with different sources of pleasure and potential fixations. 23:09 🧒 The Oedipus complex, central to Freud's theory, involves a child's sexual desires towards the parent of the opposite sex and rivalry with the parent of the same sex. 24:33 🔄 Freud posited that psychological pathologies can result from regression to earlier psychosexual stages or fixation at a particular stage. 26:08 📜 Freud's "Totem and Taboo" explores the Oedipus complex in the context of primitive societies, suggesting a collective murder of the tyrannical father figure. 29:48 💡 Freud's concept of the Oedipus complex reveals how unconscious desires and societal morality intersect, influencing individual behavior. 34:54 🧠 Freud's insights into the Oedipus complex and repression shed light on the conflict between natural impulses and societal expectations. 40:02 💭 Nietzsche's concept of the unconscious aligns with Freud's ideas, particularly regarding the unconscious nature of desires and dreams. 44:57 🧠 Freud conceptualized the unconscious as "the it" or "something," distinct from the conscious "I" or ego. 46:34 🤔 Freud's model reconceptualizes consciousness as transitory, challenging the idea of a stable personality. 47:59 🧭 Freud argues that conscious ideas are transient and can become unconscious or latent, challenging conventional notions of permanence. 50:04 💡 Psychoanalysis reveals repression through resistance, where unconscious desires manifest as conscious resistance. 53:29 🔄 Unpleasurable sensations impel change or discharge, drawing attention and energy, unlike pleasurable ones. 55:42 🌊 Blocked impulses from the ID become conscious as unpleasure when met with resistance, revealing the ego's relationship with the ID. 57:47 👥 The super ego, influenced by parental authority, counters the ID's impulses, shaping individual morality and decision-making. 59:21 ⚖ The super ego's power correlates with the strength of the ID's impulses, affecting conscience and moral decision-making. 01:03:42 🤝 Conflicts between the ego and the ideal reflect the contrast between external reality and internal desires, mediated by the super ego. 01:04:25 🔍 Freud expands the scope of sexuality beyond reproduction, likening libido to Schopenhauer's will and Plato's Eros, influencing creativity and drive.

Nietzsche clearly had a profound conception of the unconscious, for those who thought his was shallow. Below is a partial quote of Gay Science Book Fifth, 354 - Man, like every creature, thinks unceasingly, but does not know it. The thinking which is becoming conscious of itself is only the smallest part thereof. We may say the most superficial part, the worst part for this. Conscious thinking alone is done in words, that is to say the symbols for communication, by means of which the origin of consciousness is revealed. In short, the development of speech and the development of consciousness, (not of reason, but of reason becoming self-conscious) go hand in hand. In BG&E, He says Descartes was foolish to say "question everything" yet make such an obviously false statement as the "I" is the one doing the one thinking, and not something separate. Do you fools listen to music or do you just skim through it?

Freud was as exactly as obsessed with sex as anybody else using cocaine intravenously is..he might as well been smoking crack..the effect is the same

how sorely appreciated are you muchly... o, godlikeKEAG... (i am not worthy!!)

Nietzsches got the next two centuries

Judeo-Christianity preceded all of this 2000 years ago and Freud would've been saturated with it via his constant reading of Talmud (as attested by his family) and years as a student in a Yeshiva in Tysmenitz. OEDIPUS COMPLEX - LEVITICUS 18: 6-26 6 “None of you is to come near anyone who is his close relatives to uncover their nakedness. I am Adonai. 7 “You are not to uncover the nakedness of your father or your mother. She is your mother. You shall not uncover her nakedness. 8 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife, for it is your father’s nakedness. 9 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home or elsewhere. 10 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your son’s daughter, or of your daughter’s daughter, for theirs is your own nakedness. 11 You are not to uncover the nakedness of the daughter of your father’s wife, conceived by your father, since she is your sister. 12 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister, for she is your father’s direct relative. 13 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s direct relative. 14 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother by approaching his wife, for she is your aunt. 15 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law, for she is your son’s wife. You are not to uncover her nakedness. 16 You are not to uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife, because that is your brother’s nakedness. 17 You are not to uncover the nakedness of both a woman and her daughter. You are not to take her son’s daughter, or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness, for they are direct relatives. That is wickedness. 18 You are not to marry your wife’s sister, to be a rival, uncovering her nakedness, while her sister is still alive. Not like these taboos were not widespread in virtually all Ancient cultures. Remember, Freud got into big trouble by going public w/ the dirty little secret that incestual pedophilia and sex were widespread in families as per his patients, a statement he embarrassingly had to retract as he had high profile patients and it created a scandal that all these upper crust individuals had families w/ rampant incestual sexual abuse. This is why lawyers have to dissuade righteously angry individuals seeking the death penalty for pedophiles because most pedophilia happens in the family, and the family is must less likely to come forward about a family member because they don't want to see them executed. Ergo, by getting capital punishment for the pedophile, you actually perpetuate more pedophilia. Freudian clinicians are virtually like the spotted owl now, completely overtaken by academic psychiatrists. Paglia said Freud is best viewed as an artist, and Jordan Peterson said Freudian psychoanalysis is the last flowering of alchemy. I totally get both those statements.

I am still in denial that most of what I have been writing and researching were influenced by Beef Stew. Absolutely horrifying, I’m beyond words and I feel epileptic learning that fact.

Surely easier to dismiss Nietzsche .... regarding everything. I haven't found the fabulous 'sexual opsession' in any of Freud's works I read... whilst Nietzsche is crazy like fox news. Now, saying that someone the likes of them 'LIED' (why in caps?) is a clickbait bellow any further serious... basta. Dixit.

The gratuitous swipe based on your simplistic ideas of Freud’s ideas on sexuality in the introduction demonstrate a common feature of people’s opinions of Freud: they have read none of his works, let alone a significant number of them. They have read only works *about* Freud. Freud’s works are very challenging so it’s understandable. By the way, Freud was wary of connecting psychoanalysis and Nietzsche’s speculations, indeed of any philosopher’s which dealt with the meaning of life, which he considered a sign of psychopathology. The reasons for that are to be found by reading his works themselves. There is no Readers Digest answer.

Copernicus was wrong, intentionally, Darwin same.

The narcissistism of petty prejudices is on full display in the comments as always.

With frued, he's mostly underrated for his contribution to aesthetics and literary analysis. The way in which we tend to understand symbol is purely fruedian.

I dont see the point. Nietzsches psychoanalysis is a mess. Freud is very clear, systematic and very much the opposite. Maybe he was kind of inspired, but to see a direct line and not just the zeitgeist moving forward doesnt make sense to me. Nietzsche then wouldve had a huge blind spot for his own trauma and narcism. I get that most people who are still (as i was) into him, NEED him to be this exceptional figure, but maybe just need to accept that he WASNT. his main idea was that god is dead and we need to find something new. that had more to do with him losing his father than anything else. in other words, this base of his "thinking" was a deeply psychologically influenced thing and he didnt know that. again ,huge blind spot. alice miller, a psychoanalytical "defector" publicized these facts in "der gemiedene schlüssel" and they make a lot of sense to someone knowledgable in psychology. nietzsche WASNT.

There are no Nietzscheans, otherwise they would be insane. (The insane are just that, insane.)

No matter how much you think you hate Sigmund Freud, it’s not enough. It can NEVER be enough.

Freud was a true Jew!

no one wants to become a independent being. Nietzsche lost. 😊