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 authors discuss an assassin to explain and justify the Adlerian approach versus the freudian. They object strenuously to freudian emphasis on the unconscious, on myth (Oedipus complex), and on incestuous forces that, according to Katz to whom they refer, forced Oswald to murder. Instead, they offer the Adlerian alternative of sticking to facts of current reality, such as birth order, and alternatives that offer some hope of remedy in other potential killers. They
state that the feeling of inferiority alternating with grandiosity leads to murder. This stems from the child having been neglected or unwanted and also pampered, plus an organ inferiority. This concept offers the promise of a 'commonsense' remedy rather than suggesting that all is determined in childhood and cannot be changed in later life, as in a myth dealing with fate. A good Adlerian, it is said, prepares her child for a life of coöperation, contribution, and trust which may sound idealistic if not naïve. Oswald would have been very happy to see so much printed about his consummate act and perhaps would be amused at the naïveté of the authors suggesting that there was 'no possibility of any long-term plan' to kill.