David Wright wrote:
I'll concede that Freud was a reasonably talented essayist, if one accepts that his supportiing arguments are valid. Fundamentally though, he tends to cite himself...hardly reasonable argumentation. And, while I appreciate Bloom, his kabbalistic writing must, perforce, beGod-centric.
By stating that _Genius_ was kabbalistic, I merely intended to state that Bloom arranges his discussion of the various genii in groups that correspond to the Zohar.
I ignore, of course, the fact that if one believes in Psychoanalysis or God,>it is likely that shamanistic practice based upon those beliefs will likely result in a
successful amelioration of any perceived problem.
The opposing view is Freud's, who stated that a neurosis is a private religion. It's interesting that many of us note the power of belief (in placebos, politics, cures, catharsis, redemption, whatever) while at the same time denying the content of those beliefs.
Yet is there such a thing as "belief" without the content of the belief? Eric ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
