The Dream Work of Sigmund Freud

This article replies directly to the two cornerstones of Hobson’s legendary transposition of Freud’s dream theory, that is, the theory’s presumed empirical untestability and its scientific obsolescence or replaceability in the scientific arena. After an outline of Freudian dream theory, empirical data coming from two research paradigms (“children’s dreams” and “drug dreams”) are reported. From a theoretical-epistemological point of view, the studies show that Freud’s dream theory includes clear “potential falsifiers,” that is, in Popper’s terms, certain events, which if found to be true, would unequivocally show Freud to be wrong. This challenges Hobson’s accusation concerning the empirical untestability of Freud dream theory. From an empirical viewpoint, these studies show that Freudian dream theory is not even remotely scientifically outdated and obsolete. The results of these studies are consistent with the cornerstones of Freudian dream theory (e.g., the hypothesis of dreams as wish-fulfillment, the disguise-censorship model) and suggest the viability and worth of further investigation in this arena. Indeed, Freud’s dream theory is alive and useful in explaining the phenomenon of dreams in various fields of application. These authors believe that J. A. Hobson’s dismissal of Freudian dream theory is thus misguided and premature because, to date, the findings indicate that Freud was essentially correct.

This article aims at facilitating the understanding of Freud´s dream theory for psychoanalytic as well as nonpsychoanalytic clinicians and scientists. The new perspective is based on a section of An Outline of Psychoanalysis which, to date, does not appear to have been considered adequately. This section comprises a dense summary of Freud´s dream theory applying the structural viewpoint (ego, id and super-ego). It is suggested that this section be considered as akin to a set of explanatory notes for the reading of The Interpretation of Dreams , which is illustrated herein by applying it to several paragraphs of this work. In doing so, it becomes apparent that The Interpretation of Dreams does not need to be re-written in order to integrate the structural viewpoint. Rather, both the topographical (conscious, preconscious and unconscious) and the structural viewpoint can be elegantly merged. Finally, the introduced perspective is compared to previous psychoanalytic contributions, implications for clinical application are discussed, and relevant empirical research findings are summarized.

International Journal of Dream Research, 2020

Our paper aimed at facilitating the understanding and han­dling of Freud’s dream theory. We are grateful for critical comments on our contribution by Volker Hartmann which prompt us to differentiate more explicitly between verbal and perceptual representations of the latent dream thought within Freud´s dream theory. We will thus integrate the differentiation between the following two concepts in our previous arguments: The unconscious formation of the preconscious and verbal latent dream thought: The dream work by the unconscious ego replaces the sleep-disturbing stimuli – demands upon the ego – by a harmless preconscious wish-fulfilment that still has a verbal form, called latent dream thought. This process is dominated by the different defense-mechanisms of the ego, including displacement, condensation, reversal to the contrary and symbolization. The transformation of the verbal dream-thought into a perception of things: Dream work continues by transforming – in a regressive cereb...

International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 2002

2001

This paper is primarily focus on the essay 'On Dreams' by Sigmund Freud and his work on interpretation of dreams.

Dreaming, 1994

Philosophy International Journal ISSN: 2641-9130, 2023

In 1900 the publication of the book, Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud raised very seminal and fascinating questions in the disciplines of psychology and psychoanalysis. Sigmund Freud's intellectual contributions and the discovery of unconscious had given a big jolt to all the classical approaches, shook the disciplinary foundations of psychology and placed 'psychoanalysis' as an alternative model for understanding mental world. Psychologists across the world showed keen interest in uncovering the mysteries of dreams and dreaming. But the institutional dominance of Behaviorism and its standards of research didn't allow them to cross the boundaries of conventional psychology. Behavioristic psychologists raised important questions on the methodology adopted by Sigmund Freud and leveled criticism against his unverifiable explanations. Behaviorism branded his theories as absolute subjectivist and unscientific. Hence, most of the psychologists were silent and systematically marginalized dream research and banished the discourses on dreams in the institutions of higher learning and research. The nineteenth century saw the emergence of the first dream studies, which were primarily concerned with dream phenomenology. Nevertheless, the pace of methodical dream research was held considerably by the emergence of distinct psychological movements at the start of the 20th century: behaviorism, classical psychoanalysis, and gestalt psychology, placed greater stress on the significance and meaning of dreams, as well as what they symbolized in the lives of individuals. Also a few of them questioned the reality of dreams and other similar mental experiences. Consequently, every movement undermined the greater sample sizes and more methodical research on dreams in its own unique manner. While presenting the views of Sigmund Freud, John Watson, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, and Fritz Perls this paper makes an attempt to show how classical schools of psychology slowed down the flow of systematic dream studies with large samples.

Each employed their own dreams in rather different ways: as part of an assessment of Freud's work as a psychological theory, as illustrative of the cogency of Freud's method and theories as part of the psychoanalytic process. Each adopted different approaches to the question of privacy and decorum. The paper argues that assessment of the impact of Freud's work must take account of the application of the method to the researcher's own dreams and the personal impact this process of analysis had upon them, and must also gauge how the dreamers' deployment of Freud's methods influenced their explicit relationship to him and his theories.

Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 1998

I wish to convey the enthusiasm that I feel about dreams, their significance in clinical work, and the many new ways that we have learned to understand them. I would also like to familiarize the reader with some findings about dreams that have come from neurobiologists and cognitive scientists. Some of those researchers have made broadside attacks on the psychoanalytic theory of dreams and the practice of dream interpretation; psychoanalysts have either returned the hostility or simply ignored the empirical research. My own view is that both empirical researchers and practicing psychoanalysts could benefit by a serious exchange of information. The current gap between psychoanalysis and neurobiology did not exist when psychoanalysis was founded. Freud's first scientific research (1877) was on animal neurology, the development of the nervous system of the eel. Later, one of Freud's major works was the Project for a Scientific Psychology (1895), which attempted to create a model of human mental functioning based on the neurological knowledge of his time. This work is still appreciated by cognitive neuroscientists today. If one studies the Project carefully, one realizes that most of Freud's later thinking about psychoanalytic metapsychology had its origins in the psychoneural model that he developed in the Project. Over the years, however, psychoanalysis, cognitive science, and neurobiology have become estranged from one another, although something of a dialogue (not always friendly) between the fields has continued, especially in the area of dreams. I would like to reconsider the relation of psychoanalysis to cognitive neuroscience by focusing on the theory of dreams. We will look at how modern psychoanalysis theorizes about dreams, how we approach dreams clinically, and how we can integrate the data from cognitive neuroscience with clinical observations about dreaming. The psychoanalytic view of dreams has changed dramatically in the hundred years since Freud published The Interpretation of Dreams. Many psychoanalysts, from Jung to the present, have questioned Freud's conclusion that all dreams are caused by unacceptable wishes. The White Institute has been among the leaders in revising psychoanalytic dream theory. In 1950, Frieda Fromm-Reichmann argued that many dreams do not deal with wish-fulfillment. Erich Fromm (1951) saw in the dream an attempt to express psychodynamic conflict. Paul Lippmann (1998) sees dreams as responding to both private concerns and social factors. Edgar Levenson (1983, 1991) has shown how dreams often portray the most simple truths about the dreamer's experience, truths so blunt that in the clinical setting, neither patient nor analyst may fully understand them without first reenacting them during the process of dream interpretation. I have argued (Blechner, 1983) that dreams may express things that are An earlier version was presented at a conference of the

International Journal of Dream Research, 2024

As Freud’s first successful analysis of one of his own dreams, Irma’s Injection revealed the purpose and meaning of dreams – disguised wish fulfillment – and provided a doorway to the unconscious mind. The presumption ever since has been that dreams are disguised ways of expressing (and thereby fulfilling) forbidden unconscious desires. By using an established client-centered methodology for dream interpretation, the article reviews the chronological sequence of Freud’s seminal dream of Irma’s Injection to show how each element can be readily recognized in terms of the most pressing issues in Freud’s life at that time and tied to events and situations that largely occurred within the days, even hours, of the Irma dream. The analysis will identify the actual people and biographical events informing Freud’s dream, specify the recency of those real-life events, and use Freud’s own words to demonstrate the direct “self-evident” meaning of each dream image, while repeatedly rejecting the presumption of disguise. By removing the distortions imposed by the theory of disguise, Freud’s dream, like any dream, can be seen as an is an intrinsically honest expression of the dreamer’s life experience and is abundantly valuable and completely sufficient in its so-called “manifest” meaning alone. The self-evident meaning of dream images may, at first impression, appear mysterious and baffling, but it is not because of some unconscious process of active disguise. It is simply because dreams express feelings through a marvelous imagic language, which the dreamer, and only the dreamer, can learn to discern for its highly individualized, self-recognizable wisdom.

The Interpretation of Dreams (German: Die Traumdeutung) is a 1899 book by psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, in which the author introduces his theory of the unconscious with respect to dream interpretation, and discusses what would later become the theory of the Oedipus complex. Freud revised the book at least eight times and, in the third edition, added an extensive section which treated dream symbolism very literally, following the influence of Wilhelm Stekel. Freud said of this work, "Insight such as this falls to one's lot but once in a lifetime

This paper suggests that The Interpretation of Dreams contains some of Freud's most provocative, far-reaching, and powerful psychoanalytic insights regarding futurity, intersubjective communication, and the relationship between the dream, the dreamer, and the world. By focusing on the specific status and function of the dream (as opposed to all other psychic actions), this paper explores how and why the singular language of dreams-and the very possibility of dream interpretation-provide a specifically psychoanalytic model of translation. The essay examines the specific status of the dream by appealing to a selection of important and influential philosophical readings of Freud's text