Interesting! As a psychologist I made a similar experience. It seems impossible to question the victim-blaming ideology of psychoanalysis. Something I've wanted to discuss with my colleagues for over 25 years: In 1997, Professor Otto Kernberg gave a lecture to over 1,000 professionals at one of the largest psychotherapeutic training events in Germany, the "Lindau Psychotherapy Weeks," about a woman with depression. She had been raped by her father as a girl of (unspecified) "under 10 years old." She experienced this situation "as is so typical... as a sexually arousing triumph over her mother" and had to "tolerate her guilt." (Furthermore, she also had to learn to "identify with the sexual arousal of the sadistic, incestuous father"—whatever that might mean.) The lecture is still available for purchase in its original audio. Two years later, it was published in the journal PTT, which Kernberg co-edited. Not only was Kernberg enthusiastically applauded. In the year of his lecture, he was also elected president of the International Psychoanalytical Association.
For many years, I tried—essentially in vain—to discuss this outrageous situation with colleagues in (literally) thousands of emails. Media representatives ignored the topic, which I repeatedly tried to present to them in easily digestible terms. This led me to believe that my criticism was encountering massive protective walls, walls that had somehow been erected around such an obviously perverse "psychotherapeutic" way of thinking.
My explanation for this phenomenon, which I have developed over many years, is this: There are certain theories that fit well into the agenda of those in power. Therefore, they are protected. And the many colleagues who conform to the norm are subject to herd instinct. They wait to see if a signal is given from a higher authority indicating that they can move in this or that direction. This signal, however, never arrives, as the relevant "higher" positions have long been occupied by compliant functionaries. So everything continues as before.
Incidentally, Erich von Holst made a fascinating observation about herd instinct in the late 1930s. More on that in the next comment.
-- Kernberg, Otto F. (1997): Persönlichkeitsentwicklung und Trauma. (Personality Development and Trauma.) Audio recording of the lecture at the Lindau Psychotherapy Weeks 1997. Auditorium Network
-- Kernberg, Otto F. (1999): Persönlichkeitsentwicklung und Trauma. In: Persönlichkeitsstörungen – Theorie und Therapie (PTT), 1999, Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 5-15
What is called "herd instinct" is important. I see two elements to it. First, the normal human social drive, the urge to be part of a group rather than alone. Many people would rather embrace a foolish or even wrong idea if it meant staying with the group than be right but isolated. Second is the drive to get up the hierarchy, which means absorbing the values of the group in order to gain advancement. This one is fully conscious.
Yes, it certainly involves the conscious desire to pursue a "career" and rise through the ranks. And I also believe that additional mechanisms come into play. Somewhere—I can't remember where—I once read that when the English began capturing and shipping slaves en masse in Africa, they quickly established secret societies within allied tribes to help them maintain control over the situation. Such (secret) societies still exist today in many forms: student fraternities, Freemasons' lodges, Lions Clubs, political parties, and so on.
Almost 20 years ago, I read an article in the German news magazine "DER SPIEGEL" about initiation rituals in Dutch student fraternities. Those who join a student fraternity hope – with good reason, due to the connections they have made – for a prospect of a good position in their professional life. The article (https://www.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/uni/hollaendische-aufnahmerituale-gedemuetigt-ausgesetzt-blamiert-a-513603.html) initially disturbed and repulsed me: Prospective members had to have sex with a chicken in front of the group, after which they were left—dressed in pantyhose or garbage bags and high heels—by a highway and tasked with finding their own way home. It wasn't until several years later that I realized how ingenious and useful such an "initiation ritual" actually is: Anyone who participates in this ritual guarantees that they can cast aside all scruples when expected. And when such candidates later—in positions of power—are held responsible for some outrageous measures and are then questioned about them by the media, they remember how they fabricated some story on the highway back then to reassure the astonished and inquisitive drivers and motivate them to cooperate as desired.
In other words: I now assume that truly powerful positions in society are controlled by truly powerful people. It's not enough to simply have the ambition to climb the ladder. Candidates must also PROVE that they are willing to sell their souls, their morals, their grandmothers, and much more. Only then are they allowed into such positions. The even higher rites for even higher positions are presumably only received in places like Lolita Island, where one then—presumably in front of rolling cameras—explicitly makes oneself vulnerable to blackmail and consciously delivers oneself into the hands of "the organization."
In my last comment, I mentioned that I wanted to address another insight regarding the swarm principle: In the struggle for survival, it can be both advantageous and necessary to act collectively and as a group. This is why larger herds or swarms often form in the animal kingdom, coordinating their movements with near-perfect precision. Individual animals are harder for predators to catch within a school of birds or fish. Therefore, for the individual, automatically adapting to the behavior of their swarm is usually a survival advantage. This instinct is undoubtedly present in us humans as well.
However, this herd instinct is not necessarily beneficial, as we know from the tragic history of humankind.
There is an experiment by Erich von Holst from the late 1930s. His student Konrad Lorenz describes it: Minnows are small freshwater fish that move in schools. Von Holst removed the forebrain of one of these fish for specific reasons. After this operation, the fish was able to swim and feed without any problems. However, it apparently lost its fearfulness as a result. When he was placed in a pool where a school of minnows was already swimming in tight formation, he initially swam—without paying any attention to the school—just as he pleased: crisscrossing the water. And what do you think happened after a few moments? - - - After a short time, the entire school was swimming after the brain-amputated minnow. Does this experiment perhaps illustrate how group dynamics and politics work?
Norbert Bischof, also a student of von Holst, recounts: During a conference, a functionary of the Nazi Party (NSDAP) became interested in von Holst's research and, before the assembled audience, asked whether something like a Führer principle existed in the animal kingdom. The fearless von Holst reported on the experiment and added "that it only takes a brain defect to allow an individual to rise to the leadership of the group. (...) The official turned pale and had no further questions."
When von Holst was held accountable, he, who had merely relied on empirical findings, got off with a warning.
Bischof, Norbert (1997): Das Rätsel Ödipus. Die biologischen Wurzeln des Urkonfliktes von Intimität und Autonomie. München, Piper (pp. 305f)
Lorenz, Konrad (1963): Das sogenannte Böse. Zur Naturgeschichte der Aggression. Wien, Dr. G. Borotha-Schoeler-Verlag (p. 221)
In humans, a moral defect is highly advantageous in rising to the top of the hierarchy. Scruples get in the way while a strong sense of self-righteousness is essential, especially in attracting other, less certain people as followers.
As you point out, the microcosm always reflects the macrocosm. Or as Karl, not Popper, the open society prophet, which begat the Open Society of Georges Soros and the Epstein class, I say no more, so Karl Marx then:" the dominant discourse is always the discourse of the dominant class" and of its lackeys & minions, if I may add. In my little field of Political Economy, now transmogrified into Economics, Nobel prize sanctified voodoo economics please do not ever mention the concept of class, or you will be burned immediately at the stake, or worse, shunned & cancelled. So it goes...until the Tower of Babble collapses under the sheer weight of lies and contradictions...we could well be at such an historical juncture...Une autre ruse de l'Histoire?
Neoliberalism was just a ploy to steepen the hierarchy, to enrich the rich further at the expense of the working cl_sses (I didn't say it). And yes, we may well be at a turning point. We can hope.
Interesting! As a psychologist I made a similar experience. It seems impossible to question the victim-blaming ideology of psychoanalysis. Something I've wanted to discuss with my colleagues for over 25 years: In 1997, Professor Otto Kernberg gave a lecture to over 1,000 professionals at one of the largest psychotherapeutic training events in Germany, the "Lindau Psychotherapy Weeks," about a woman with depression. She had been raped by her father as a girl of (unspecified) "under 10 years old." She experienced this situation "as is so typical... as a sexually arousing triumph over her mother" and had to "tolerate her guilt." (Furthermore, she also had to learn to "identify with the sexual arousal of the sadistic, incestuous father"—whatever that might mean.) The lecture is still available for purchase in its original audio. Two years later, it was published in the journal PTT, which Kernberg co-edited. Not only was Kernberg enthusiastically applauded. In the year of his lecture, he was also elected president of the International Psychoanalytical Association.
For many years, I tried—essentially in vain—to discuss this outrageous situation with colleagues in (literally) thousands of emails. Media representatives ignored the topic, which I repeatedly tried to present to them in easily digestible terms. This led me to believe that my criticism was encountering massive protective walls, walls that had somehow been erected around such an obviously perverse "psychotherapeutic" way of thinking.
My explanation for this phenomenon, which I have developed over many years, is this: There are certain theories that fit well into the agenda of those in power. Therefore, they are protected. And the many colleagues who conform to the norm are subject to herd instinct. They wait to see if a signal is given from a higher authority indicating that they can move in this or that direction. This signal, however, never arrives, as the relevant "higher" positions have long been occupied by compliant functionaries. So everything continues as before.
Incidentally, Erich von Holst made a fascinating observation about herd instinct in the late 1930s. More on that in the next comment.
-- Kernberg, Otto F. (1997): Persönlichkeitsentwicklung und Trauma. (Personality Development and Trauma.) Audio recording of the lecture at the Lindau Psychotherapy Weeks 1997. Auditorium Network
-- Kernberg, Otto F. (1999): Persönlichkeitsentwicklung und Trauma. In: Persönlichkeitsstörungen – Theorie und Therapie (PTT), 1999, Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 5-15
What is called "herd instinct" is important. I see two elements to it. First, the normal human social drive, the urge to be part of a group rather than alone. Many people would rather embrace a foolish or even wrong idea if it meant staying with the group than be right but isolated. Second is the drive to get up the hierarchy, which means absorbing the values of the group in order to gain advancement. This one is fully conscious.
Yes, it certainly involves the conscious desire to pursue a "career" and rise through the ranks. And I also believe that additional mechanisms come into play. Somewhere—I can't remember where—I once read that when the English began capturing and shipping slaves en masse in Africa, they quickly established secret societies within allied tribes to help them maintain control over the situation. Such (secret) societies still exist today in many forms: student fraternities, Freemasons' lodges, Lions Clubs, political parties, and so on.
Almost 20 years ago, I read an article in the German news magazine "DER SPIEGEL" about initiation rituals in Dutch student fraternities. Those who join a student fraternity hope – with good reason, due to the connections they have made – for a prospect of a good position in their professional life. The article (https://www.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/uni/hollaendische-aufnahmerituale-gedemuetigt-ausgesetzt-blamiert-a-513603.html) initially disturbed and repulsed me: Prospective members had to have sex with a chicken in front of the group, after which they were left—dressed in pantyhose or garbage bags and high heels—by a highway and tasked with finding their own way home. It wasn't until several years later that I realized how ingenious and useful such an "initiation ritual" actually is: Anyone who participates in this ritual guarantees that they can cast aside all scruples when expected. And when such candidates later—in positions of power—are held responsible for some outrageous measures and are then questioned about them by the media, they remember how they fabricated some story on the highway back then to reassure the astonished and inquisitive drivers and motivate them to cooperate as desired.
In other words: I now assume that truly powerful positions in society are controlled by truly powerful people. It's not enough to simply have the ambition to climb the ladder. Candidates must also PROVE that they are willing to sell their souls, their morals, their grandmothers, and much more. Only then are they allowed into such positions. The even higher rites for even higher positions are presumably only received in places like Lolita Island, where one then—presumably in front of rolling cameras—explicitly makes oneself vulnerable to blackmail and consciously delivers oneself into the hands of "the organization."
Agreed, except Epstein's business was but a tiny part of the corruption at top end of town.
In my last comment, I mentioned that I wanted to address another insight regarding the swarm principle: In the struggle for survival, it can be both advantageous and necessary to act collectively and as a group. This is why larger herds or swarms often form in the animal kingdom, coordinating their movements with near-perfect precision. Individual animals are harder for predators to catch within a school of birds or fish. Therefore, for the individual, automatically adapting to the behavior of their swarm is usually a survival advantage. This instinct is undoubtedly present in us humans as well.
However, this herd instinct is not necessarily beneficial, as we know from the tragic history of humankind.
There is an experiment by Erich von Holst from the late 1930s. His student Konrad Lorenz describes it: Minnows are small freshwater fish that move in schools. Von Holst removed the forebrain of one of these fish for specific reasons. After this operation, the fish was able to swim and feed without any problems. However, it apparently lost its fearfulness as a result. When he was placed in a pool where a school of minnows was already swimming in tight formation, he initially swam—without paying any attention to the school—just as he pleased: crisscrossing the water. And what do you think happened after a few moments? - - - After a short time, the entire school was swimming after the brain-amputated minnow. Does this experiment perhaps illustrate how group dynamics and politics work?
Norbert Bischof, also a student of von Holst, recounts: During a conference, a functionary of the Nazi Party (NSDAP) became interested in von Holst's research and, before the assembled audience, asked whether something like a Führer principle existed in the animal kingdom. The fearless von Holst reported on the experiment and added "that it only takes a brain defect to allow an individual to rise to the leadership of the group. (...) The official turned pale and had no further questions."
When von Holst was held accountable, he, who had merely relied on empirical findings, got off with a warning.
Bischof, Norbert (1997): Das Rätsel Ödipus. Die biologischen Wurzeln des Urkonfliktes von Intimität und Autonomie. München, Piper (pp. 305f)
Lorenz, Konrad (1963): Das sogenannte Böse. Zur Naturgeschichte der Aggression. Wien, Dr. G. Borotha-Schoeler-Verlag (p. 221)
In humans, a moral defect is highly advantageous in rising to the top of the hierarchy. Scruples get in the way while a strong sense of self-righteousness is essential, especially in attracting other, less certain people as followers.
Thank you. I love that experiment with the brain amputated minnow, it precisely describes current USA politics.
Thank you very much as well. I'm glad it pleased you.
As you point out, the microcosm always reflects the macrocosm. Or as Karl, not Popper, the open society prophet, which begat the Open Society of Georges Soros and the Epstein class, I say no more, so Karl Marx then:" the dominant discourse is always the discourse of the dominant class" and of its lackeys & minions, if I may add. In my little field of Political Economy, now transmogrified into Economics, Nobel prize sanctified voodoo economics please do not ever mention the concept of class, or you will be burned immediately at the stake, or worse, shunned & cancelled. So it goes...until the Tower of Babble collapses under the sheer weight of lies and contradictions...we could well be at such an historical juncture...Une autre ruse de l'Histoire?
Neoliberalism was just a ploy to steepen the hierarchy, to enrich the rich further at the expense of the working cl_sses (I didn't say it). And yes, we may well be at a turning point. We can hope.
Excellent summary of:
- the “who” following the words “Who should deal with mental trouble?” in the 8th paragraph from the end, and
the “how” (punishment, drugs, et cetera).
I agree that this is the biggest problem of all, something that the courts, lawyers and many others have to deal with regularly.
And only psychiatrists are recognised to deal with all this.