 |
 |

Freud and Metaphor
HARVEY NASH, Ph.D.
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1962;7(1):25-29.
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
I.
That Freud made liberal use of metaphor in discussing his ideas is evident from even a casual inspection of his writings. Freud was wont to note resemblances between events in the lives of his patients and already familiar events from other domains of his experience. These comparisons, when not explicit, are revealed by Freud's metaphorical language.*
Freud's frequent resort to metaphor indicates, at the very least, that he appreciated the value of figurative constructions in the rapid delivery of ideas. But close examination of Freud's ideas and their manner of presentation strongly suggests the further conclusion that Freud not only illustrated by metaphor, he also conceived in metaphor; moreover, that he suffered like the rest of us from lapses of metaphor; and finally, that his concepts are most often lucid when his images are consistent, whereas his ideas stand in need of correction or further
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]
Author Affiliations
CHICAGO
Footnotes
Submitted for publication April 26, 1961.
Distinct from metaphor, in which the things compared are related as species to species, is synecdoche, a kindred figure in which the things compared are related either as species to genus, as part to whole, or vice versa. Much early opposition to psychoanalysis was stimulated by 3 synecdoches which are basic to the thinking of Freud, who likened: (1) mental processes of all mankind to those observed among the mentally ill; (2) all mental processes to those which are conscious; and (3) a variety of bodily and mental processes to those ordinarily designated as sexual.
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
|