I would not necessarily deem the Freudian conception of projection as incorrect; rather, I find it to be incomplete.
Projection, as I understand it, represents a dialectical ascendancy.
In this process, an individual imprints their subjective framework onto the world. This act resonates with the world’s determined, pattern-like nature, thereby establishing a correspondence with the subjective framework. From this correspondence, the subjective perception then integrates with the phenomenological discourse, leading to a complex interplay of ideas, experiences, and understanding. This process, thus, can be considered as a participatory being, where both the perceiver and the perceived actively contribute to the ongoing formation of subjective reality.
Fascinating. Just to clarify, are you saying there is an objective reality that acts as a sort of platform for the subjective perception to be imprinted?
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
The headline was purposefully designed to provoke discussion. I don't agree with the crowd that disavow his foundational discoveries. He was literally pioneering the charge into uncharted waters. I have a deep reverence for him and what he uncovered.
Many who disavow him have not actually read him. In my experience, they are simply imitating their college professors who often are disguising their misandry with comments about him being "weird about sex". I have a deep reverence for him and what he uncovered.
Would you like to say more about project as an effect of personal boundary function? As in, a way to protect from a perceived threat?
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
I would not necessarily deem the Freudian conception of projection as incorrect; rather, I find it to be incomplete.
Projection, as I understand it, represents a dialectical ascendancy.
In this process, an individual imprints their subjective framework onto the world. This act resonates with the world’s determined, pattern-like nature, thereby establishing a correspondence with the subjective framework. From this correspondence, the subjective perception then integrates with the phenomenological discourse, leading to a complex interplay of ideas, experiences, and understanding. This process, thus, can be considered as a participatory being, where both the perceiver and the perceived actively contribute to the ongoing formation of subjective reality.
Fascinating. Just to clarify, are you saying there is an objective reality that acts as a sort of platform for the subjective perception to be imprinted?
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/what-is-cultural-marxism/
In very broad stroke of the brush, yes.
Objective reality allows projection to gain its ontological validity.
Fuck you and your Jewish god.
“Woke,” “wokeism,” “wokeness,” etc., are weasel words used to hide the truth about the Jews and the Frankfurt School . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/how-the-grift-right-gimps-for-the
Bruv 😆 You make some interesting points about cultural marxism, but no one will listen when you talk like this.
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/what-is-cultural-marxism/
Where does this boundary hole exist? How do you see narcissism as leading to a bigger boundary hole?
Thank you for your thoughtful comment Paul.
The headline was purposefully designed to provoke discussion. I don't agree with the crowd that disavow his foundational discoveries. He was literally pioneering the charge into uncharted waters. I have a deep reverence for him and what he uncovered.
Many who disavow him have not actually read him. In my experience, they are simply imitating their college professors who often are disguising their misandry with comments about him being "weird about sex". I have a deep reverence for him and what he uncovered.
Would you like to say more about project as an effect of personal boundary function? As in, a way to protect from a perceived threat?
They are pretty cool, thanks for sharing. Where can I see the rest of them?
The Frankfurt School adapted Marx’s theories on revolution to include Freud’s theory of the subconscious. The Cultural Marxists’ main focus was to reshape the subconscious of Western men and women and thus create new type of person: one who would react passively to provocations of all kinds.
https://nordicresistancemovement.org/what-is-cultural-marxism/