Peter Emer

The Lil Project

This conversation is closed.

How simple are humans?

I was just thinking in terms of psychology...after learning about sigmund freud and his Thanatos and Eros, it made me wonder if we could be that simple. According to his view humans have innate Thanatos ( drives evil...aggression etc) and Eros which is more loving and peaceful. They are innate but require innate stimulus to show themselves... This theory has a a somewhat firm grounding in psychology...and its simplicity baffles me. So if anyone wants to share or comment as to there own theories...feel free.

  • thumb
    Nov 9 2011: So simple - if we tthink about men : ) it's a joke of course : )
    I thisnk that some ideas of Sigmund Freud are simple. Too simple. Not human beings
  • Nov 4 2011: its an awesome question. Are human beings indeed simple ?
    >> I feel, human beings become more simple and easy towards LOVE but also become more complicated and tough towards HATRED/FEAR. How simple a human is - depends on how simple his environment is. I cant define Environment in terms of simplicity but beauty, so do the human beings =)
  • thumb
    Nov 4 2011: There is no science backing Freud's theories. He should be credited for takling the mind as something else than a soul. But Thanatos and Eros and such ideas are as dead as disco.
    Modern and more serious psychology has indeed more complexe explanations of the human mind.

    I hate it when psychoanalysis nerds have a ready-made answer about dream imagery. I remember being in a time of my life where I had to face some hardship, was deeply in debt and was stressed about what decisions I had to make. It told a friend about an epic dream of mine where I went down a well... He interupted me : That's a vagina.
    Pisses me off. There is a nasty part of psychology with absolutely nothing scientific about it, and it's excused on the account that it's a "Human science". So screw proper experimental research, it's not cold physics. It's a delicate "human science" you see...
    Don't bother with Freud or Bettleheim. Read guys like Pinker for intelligent explanations.
    • thumb
      Nov 4 2011: You have got some good points. (Are you sure disco is dead?)

      I have read a bit about defunct psychology theories.

      Dream imagery is pretty interesting though. Have you read anything by Joseph Campbell? He was a bit of a guru on mythologies from around the world and makes some interesting points about recurring and common dream imagery and how they relate to myths (which he calls the collective dream).

      But I agree with you. Lots of theories on psychology seem way too subjective. I also do not like cereal-box psychology. The minute something becomes a generalisation, it's usually lost all relevance.
      • thumb
        Nov 5 2011: I'll look Campbell up. I like the idea that we have universal hardware images in our brains. Sounds perfectly reasonnable that snakes are inborn images in all apes, or at least the aproximate geometry of them or the aproximate way they move until apes actually see their first one.
        Yeah I bet it's the way snakes move that is imprinted in ape brains, for safety reasons.
        All this is interesting. As you say, cereal box psychology is barely skimming the surface of what it claims to study. There is more to our psyche than mommy and daddy.
      • thumb
        Nov 5 2011: I'll check disco's pulse when I get the chance.
      • thumb
        Nov 9 2011: I've begun reading Hero with a Thousand Faces. The man is fascinating.
        And myths are alike. So I wonder. How much is biological hardwire, and how much is just oral tradition from long, long ago (when humans were very few, and concentrated in a small area)?

        Thanks for Campbell!
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2011: It's pretty cool how there is so much common ground in the basic fabric of world mythology. Whether or not that is something we can tap into to help improve ourselves, I'm not sure but he cites some interesting psych stories that have obvious connections with themes and archetypes in myth.