Discussion of Sigmund Freud.

Between the years 1928 and 1932, Sigmund Freud occasionally assembled a small group of members of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society for scientific discussions. These informal meetings took place on Wednesday evenings at Freud's home. The author reports what he was able to preserve of Freud's remarks on some of these occasions.     

Freud, Oedipus and the Hebrew Bible

The current paper examines the question of why Freud employed Greek rather than Hebrew foundation legends, specifically the story of Oedipus, as a basis for psychoanalysis, Freud's choice of Oedipus emanates from his deterministic view of the universe, paralleling the Greek rather that the Biblical story of creation. In the Biblical account God precedes and creates nature with no sign of an Oedipal conflict. In the Greek account, nature precedes the gods and the Oedipal conflict is inherent. Freud's choice has implications for his view of human psychology.     

Sigmund Freud and the diagram-maker school of aphasiology.

Published 100 years ago, Freud's monograph on aphasia, Zur Auffassung der Aphasien, is an incisive analysis of the so-called diagram-makers, those aphasiologists who would reduce brain and language to simple schemes of circumscribed cortical centers linked by unidirectional subcortical pathways. Chief architects of the diagram-maker school were Wernicke and Lichtheim, and their formulations of conduction aphasia and the transcortical aphasias were particular targets of Freud's trenchant criticism. Freud argued against functional differentiation within left hemisphere perisylvian language regions, and he suggested that traditional aphasic syndromes were artifacts of lesions that included cortical language regions and deeper white matter pathways not directly involved with language. He provided an innovative classification of aphasia based on types of associations presumed to be affected. Freud, however, failed to adduce new clinical or pathological observations; he was perhaps unnecessarily harsh in challenging authorities in the field of aphasia; and his theory had to compete with a straightforward and already entrenched anatomical view of language representation. Despite Freud's lucid argumentation, his carefully crafted monograph was never widely noted.