I’ve got to just start here or I’m never going to get to it.

I don’t even know how to spell the poor man’s name and yet I think I have the gusto to challenge his ideas. Oh well, here goes.

One last checkpoint before I put this thing into drive: I am going off of claims that I have heard others that I believe to be knowledgeable in the area make. I haven’t studied enough to feel those claims are absolutely accurate, but from subtext clues from the culture, I believe they are accurate enough to counter. Even if the representations of the claims of Frued (leaving misspelling to show ignorance in the text) are inaccurate, the conclusions I draw in this essay are interesting and perhaps very useful nonetheless. I’m going to start writing this in a very boring state without music and perhaps I may put some on as it continues. I don’t anticipate it being that long though. At the end, I’m going to come up with all kinds of different post titles to post a very small subset of these thoughts to /r/ShowerThoughts, as I came up with them while in the shower. No way of telling whether or not I’m lying right now, but I’m not going to waste any more of your attention quibbling about nothingabouts.

My Understanding of Freud’s Idea Relating Mother, Father, and Son

I’ve heard the idea of ‘fuck your mother, kill your father’ associated with Freud one too many times to dismiss it as innacurate of his ideas. I am fully aware that the culture likes to grab things and make them terribly untrue for the sake of pretending they know anything, but I don’t believe that effect has fully been had on this particular term.

I believe Freud thought something along the lines of: ‘A son is going to have an urge to have sex with his mother and also kill his father.’ Perhaps he never claimed this. Perhaps he never believed this. Perhaps he has claimed something similar and it has been misintreppeted. Whatever the case, I intend to set everything straight in terms of the psychology, philosophy, and biology behind this whole kerfuffle.

How Jung’s Concepts Would Have Greatly Aided Freud

I believe there is simply a misunderstanding of a claim behind an archetype versus a concrete manifestation, or a form in term’s of Platonic thinking.

Freud, given his cornucopia of knowledge (brownie points if you can find in the video how many times I attempted to spell that word cornucopia), was a man passionate about pursuing meaning, truth, and explanation, and did so with analogies and allusions to reality that we touch and feel in our daily lives.

I believe what Freud would have been getting on about would be the following:

The son wants to destroy a sub archetype of what his mother represents as well as a greater sub archetype that his father represents.

The archetype of the father and the archetype of the mother are NOT the father and the mother, nor do they attempt to be accurate representations of that word in ‘reality’, the thing we live. The thing where now you can stomp your feet and others around you will look at you funny. That is what most of us mean when we describe reality, but most of us also don’t really think that hard about thinking or about anything. We could say that most people that don’t think aren’t thinkers and it’s not worth thinking about the thoughts of those that don’t think, but what do I know, all I do is think. At least, I think I think. I have no way of proving it. Go listen to DeCartes blabber about proving god because if he wasn’t, nothing would be. How boring and drab, but I digress.

Biologically, we are predisposed to have the desire to procreate. After all, that’s really all we are. WE are a germ on a big ball — well, a small ball really, but we think it’s big because we’re very small. In terms of the whole place, we’re but a grain of rice. Probably much smaller. Think about how little you think about scales and then start thinking about scales and be amazed how nature has developed patterns at scales that we, previously no longer than 200 years, had no concept about the germ or the atom, let alone creating our own or fusing and shattering them to things below that which is allegedly indivisible (atom => indivisible unit) sub__atom__ic particles => whoops we should have named that differently but now it stuck.

That’s the thing too — we always think we found the end of the maze. The rub is though: there is no end of the maze. We think it’s called something currently at the unit of space that we call the ‘Planck Distance’ which is a couple times smaller than a strand of hair (Internet, please come through in correcting me here) but more than likely, in 200–500 years (or whenever the technology evolves to a point where we can ‘see deeper’) that subatomic particle and that planck distance will be laughed at by people who look no different than us.

Perhaps they will wear different clothes than we do, and perhaps they will have different sports they enjoy watching, but let’s face it. We don’t think enough to actually change much of anything anyway.

Most of us are completely happy just sitting on the couch watching our sports listening to the man on TV tell us which car we should buy so we can be happy again.

Ahh, remember when you were happy? Wasn’t that nice? The good old days… What a refreshing time it was then to be alive.

Guess what — gigs over. That pitch and schtick has been used throughout time. It’s not that it isn’t true — it’s just that it is not helpful in maximizing the fulfillment and livelihood of humanity and is in fact being taken advantage of on a psychological scale by those who control the technology. They are also creating new language and doing what they do so well in filtering language that we can use, all under the guise of the fact that it hurts people’s feelings. Guess what, people are dying every single day. Your feelings can wait until that problem is solved. Let’s come together as humanity, realized we’re all fucked up, but learn to trust each other anyway despite our differences and despite our unfamiliarities.

The media is always going to attempt to scare us out of loving each other, and there are some good reasons not to. There are many, many, many more reasons that we should though, and ESPECIALLY now that we have the technology to communicate across space time for the first time in human civilization — we should be able to realize that love is truly the answer. Love is the thing that helps us communicate.

:::+++>>> I’ve referred to love occasionally as the ‘ultimate trust compression mechanism’ -> that’ll be on the homework everyone.

Now, back to the topic at hand because I’m fairly confident the asshole moderators at /r/psychology and /r/philosophy will say that this essay ‘does not defend a hypothesis’. Well, I challenge them to call out where, but NOOOOO, no-one actually tells you what they want and how to improve. You’re just stricken down without right of challenge or any formal trial or anything. How is one supposed to get one’s thoughts out if one can’t get one’s thoughts out despite oneself believing in oneself that they have thoughts worth thinking. Those nasty thoughts again, how dreadfully slowing of the brain they can be.

Sometimes, buddhists wish to just wish away the thoughts, but that itself is a thought and they’ve been working for a couple hundred years in trying to resolve that apparent paradox.

Gessundheit!! Back to Freud

~~acutally, this turned into a rant on ye (Kanye)(Kanye West)(North West’s Dad)(SouthEast, but not the airline and it was a rapper — I quit)~~ I think I started to explain this earlier. Freud was honest. He was a man in pursuit of understanding and truth, so we must take that on face value. If he wasn’t that, he would have never been able to come up with all those theories that have stuck around in pyshgbology today. That autocorrected to the wrong word. Think about how long autocorrect had been around and then realize that people used to have to write all these thoughts with a fucking feather. You would have definitely had to mean what you said if you had to write it all out with a feather. Now, any idiot with a keyboarding OBS can record themselves blabbing up a storm and since its essentially free for me to do this, who is to say I know what I’m talking about and should be paid attention to. Well, the contents of this essay are something that I hope will aid me. Also, gifs of this writing. If I make GIFs of this writing, I wonder if people will be like, “What the fuck is this quack on about?” and I would be able to draw them in. Who knows, worth a try though.

Excerpts, but in text form. Oh, and it was live when those thoughts were coming. There are no rehearsals in truthland.

“No half truths, just naked minds” — unknown enlightened monk.

Just kidding, that was Kanye West. That man is truly enlightened, and struggles to spread his message of positivity with normal people. People like to make fun of the man because he thinks differently. Let that sink in. And if you mention that god damned hat he wears and use that as an excuse for why you don’t like him, the only conclusion left to draw about you is you belong in the group of people I described earlier. You remember, those ones that don’t think for themselves. And sure, you can tell me you think for yourself all you want, but the fact that I can have your argument for you proves otherwise. If nothing else, it proves you are not aligned with pursuing complete understanding and truth of the objective world, and so I’m not exactly sure where on the bookshelf of bullshit to place the utterances with which you waste everyone’s (at least the thinkers) time with, but I suppose it’s not even that important to do. The worst you could do to me is kill me, and I truly don’t think you care enough about anything to do that. Kanye touched on that too and I thought it was terrifyingly true.

Now Back to Freud

We return from that regularly scheduled message from the BRAIN to get back to the show.

Freud wanted to be an anomaly. He was different and he knew it. Perhaps he had sexual intimations of his mother. I wouldn’t imagine he would have been one to be ‘completely right in the head’ as he was able to access this domain of analysis so far outside his culture, that his name has stuck around this long in a field where other names aren’t so common.

Because of this imagined shortcoming (or whatever his reasoning was) he didn’t fully grasp the scope of what he was trying to refer to as one’s mother. For one doesn’t commonly have sexual intimations of one’s mother. Biologically speaking, why would that ever be selected for? Aren’t offspring ideally procreated with a mate very much outside of one’s own bloodline?

Furthermore, the idea of having a child with one’s mother should be repulsive as then you would be your brother’s father, and there’s just no way that would ever work out well for anyone ever, except for perhaps in an Eminem song. He, too, is a creative genius. WE get the new philosophers in rap and maybe in other places, but can we really say anyone is going to go down as a freud or jung in our time? If so, who would they be? Why do you think that? Do you have to be some kind of rote expert to understand their thinking or can it be explained to the layman. That’s important because it gauges how well an idea will catch on. I’m getting tired so the rest of this is probably going to be shorthand and might not make sense. But please inquire if that’s the case (in good faith, if you will please) and we can tackle misunderstanding, incorrect facts, and tightening of logical bounds around ideas to see where this exploration will take us.)

Freud was referring to fucking your mother. Mother here should be feminine if one is heterosexual male. This is just innate. WE are born to create new usses.

Freud referred to the father. Really, he was referring to the archetype of the father or at least the corrupt subset of that archetype. WE always need to fight off the anyway to reproduce, and that nature is human, completely. It’s biologically really. IT’s the selfish gene. It’s the meme. It’s the virus or germ that needs to spread. It’s the culture in the petri dish. It’s the mold on the apple. Think of it how you will, it just is and you can’t really argue against it because of the fact that you’re here of relatively little effort on your own (considering the hypothetical ~15 billion years that this rock has been cooking)

Just imagine baking a cake. It bakes in about 30–35 minutes. Take that number and divide it by 15 billion and it’s really small

int cakeTime = 35;

int universeTime =

15 * 1,000,000,000 * 356 * 24 * 60

float fraction = doFractionalDivisionOnIntsStupid(cakeTime, universeTime);

print(fraction);

Then, take the span of time humans have been around for and multiply something about those numbers above with that time. Sapiens have been around for about 70,000 years, right? Can someone spot check me there?

Anyway, chances are very low that you’re here unless something innately reproductive isn’t inherent in the very experience of being alive biologically.

Your father, or the biological and historical past that is the corrupt masculine, is something that generation n+1 must always fight off. There are always going to be ossified structures in place from a non-optimal generation n. Even if generation n does everything it can to make n+1 better, the fact of the matter is that things change too quickly out from under the feet of n for them to really do anything about it.

As a thought experiment, try building a house of cards on a carpet and having someone move the carpet out from underneath you, or perhaps more subtly, trying to build that house of cards on an airplane. Invisible forces will make your tower fall over. Building civilizations is kind of like that, except that we have a chance to make it better because we can communicate; which brings me to my next point.

Embracing the Feminine Mother is Key to Wisdom and Success in Culture

Perhaps Freud was on to something. WE must, as men, get passed any involuntary sexual urge to truly appreciate the feminine. People that get upset about this idea, please yell as loud as you possibly can. We want to find you and label you dunce language police. Relax and counter the idea, don’t get so frustrated about everything. Remember, people are dying; your feelings can wait.

Most men can be controlled fairly easily. Under the boot of the chance of sex. To some men, sex comes easier and perhaps doesn’t pose a challenge to ‘collect’ as much of it as they please, but nonetheless, it does control them. For, if it were to be withdrawn from the ability to do, they would be gripped by the carnal desires that we’ve already covered the source for above.

Once men learn to control involuntary sexual urges, they can switch to nurture mode, which ironically and counter intuitively leads closer to enlightenment than anything in solely the masculine arena alone.

One cannot become any closer to enlightenment without embracing the power of the feminine. Men don’t know how to communicate well. Women do, on many different levels. I’ve been listening to videos that my wife listens to on YouTube and they follow very particular patterns that allow all watching to operate with minimal effort in understanding opinions. Men lie and deceive in ways they do this. I don’t have very much evidence for this claim but could probably produce a reasonable example if prodded further.

What we as men don’t realize is that humility and understanding are key in advancing societies. We think that we can walk all over everyone and be the greatest and act like our shit doesn’t stink and that we’ll come out with the coolest cars and all kinds of other dumb things that simply exist to appease those involuntary desires for shiny things. I was going to write an essay comparing us to hypothetical (yet very realistic) sounding made-up tribes of apes. I didn’t do that and I’m not going to now, but I’m trying to remember everything I want to eventually do. Please prod me for that if you’re interested in reading more.

I guess I’m just going to abruptly close here. I’m not a great writer, but I am a great thinker.

I hope I’ve made some points very clearly here, and completely understand I have a ways to go before everything makes sense to you.

However, I do make the money back guarantee that, if you’re reading this, and in good faith, you take me on the challenge of reaching complete understanding with you, I could absolutely do so without fail, so long as you tell the truth.

We could also spread that practice to everyone and it will do a lot of good for a lot of people. We just kind of need to get started soon because we’re all going to do way before the cake has finished baking. I guess does that make God the oven, the baker, the house, the city, the neighborhood? How long did existence exist before the universe began? Who knows!? I can’t answer those questions and no one else can either. If they tell you they can, the likelihood that what they’re telling you is lower than the chances you’re wearing a white shirt right now, and those chances are pretty low.

I’m Making the Following Freud Correction: Copulate with Mother ::>> Path to wisdom is through getting passed involuntary desires innate to being a heterosexual human male.

Kill Father ::>> Free oneself and one’s peers from the shackles of tyranny and corruption caused by the ossified masculine archetype. Be one’s own person. [file:937804F9–78B2–427E-BCCC-EDA4ED453D13–633–00020698272099C7/correcting freud.mp4] [image:4A5F6F4B-7184–4341–8942–4A6667722862–633–000206796520A0A8/Screen Shot 2018–10–21 at 2.31.06 AM.png]

Afterwords

Tags

freud,mother father freud,corrections,debate,freud was wrong,Oedipus complex