|Friedman, J.A. (1992). Freud's Todestrieb: Part 2. Int. R. Psycho-Anal., 19:309-322.|
Viewing the full text of this document requires a subscription to PEP Web.
If you are coming in from a university from a registered IP address or secure referral page you should not need to log in. Contact your university librarian in the event of problems.
If you have a personal subscription on your own account or through a Society or Institute please put your username and password in the box below. Any difficulties should be reported to your group administrator.
(1992). International Review of Psycho-Analysis, 19:309-322
Freud's Todestrieb: Part 2
has, for the most part, Freud's Todestrieb, claiming it is too speculative, biological or even autobiographical. In the first part, it was shown how the notion of Todestrieb is properly understood only in the context of Freud's and questioning. Here, '' itself appears not as a brute, biological fact, but rather as the destiny/destination of the living entity, with such a journey driven by an instinctual urge. Such an understanding is founded on the of the and on the disclosure of the essential nature of as 'conservative'.
Repeating and Binding (Freud's Bindung)
In Freud's 1914 paper on , entitled ', repeating [ Wiederholen ] and ', we find the first published use of the term '' (Wiederholungszwang). In the treatment, the 'Wiederholungszwang' is the patient's way of .
We may say that the patient does not remember anything of what he has forgotten and repressed, but acts it out. He reproduces it not as a but as an ; he repeats it, without, of course, knowing that he is repeating it (p. 150).
We make note here of the nature of this reproduction. It appears as '', as gesture and attitude, in other words as (bertragung) and (Widerstand). It is a form of re-production that resists represented as a verbal , that is, as words. So Freud states, and here is the
[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]