You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The author has apparently unwittingly followed his own facetious formula for successful psychological writing. 'The only safe formula appears to be to say nothing at all which could possibly offend anyone, while taking great care to put in something to please everybody. Passing tribute should be paid to Freud, while deploring his theories on sex; and in conclusion the existence of an unconscious should be denied.' With regard to Freud's sexual theories, for example, he deplores the use of the word sex in connection 'with early emotions not tinged with overt sex', as likely to evoke misunderstanding. As to the existence of the unconscious his attitude is more complicated; he would, no doubt, deny his disbelief. By his examples and methods, however, he shows that his belief is static, and lacking in any vitality. The unconscious is a far off region, which usually has no importance to normal individuals, but which may, unfortunately, have to be considered in certain stubborn pathological conditions which will not respond to simple therapeutic methods. The unconscious as a vital dynamic part of all human beings, well or ill, has no meaning for him. This attitude, it seems. is common to those who deal with psychotherapy without convincing personal experience of the reality of the unconscious.