WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.200 --> 00:00:04.639
<v Speaker 1>Okay, we often though, we throw out these other words

2
00:00:04.679 --> 00:00:07.719
<v Speaker 1>like big other. It's become part of our parlance, and

3
00:00:07.759 --> 00:00:09.960
<v Speaker 1>I don't know if we're using it strictly or not.

4
00:00:10.160 --> 00:00:11.919
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to say we use it incorrectly, but

5
00:00:12.000 --> 00:00:17.280
<v Speaker 1>it's not not perhaps as strict as the context might demand.

6
00:00:17.960 --> 00:00:22.280
<v Speaker 1>But if we're going to cover psychoanalysis, why now? What's

7
00:00:22.320 --> 00:00:29.000
<v Speaker 1>the benefit? LACAN is always relevant insofar as someone or

8
00:00:29.039 --> 00:00:33.079
<v Speaker 1>someone around you is doing things worth analyzing, and at

9
00:00:33.159 --> 00:00:36.320
<v Speaker 1>least for me, why I think this is a pertinent

10
00:00:36.399 --> 00:00:42.679
<v Speaker 1>to go into now is because of belief, the competitions

11
00:00:43.000 --> 00:00:48.600
<v Speaker 1>for belief, the factions of belief. Politically speaking, those voices

12
00:00:48.640 --> 00:00:52.520
<v Speaker 1>that appear on the news, what do all these different

13
00:00:52.640 --> 00:00:56.240
<v Speaker 1>groups want, particularly the factions of the right wing. They're fun,

14
00:00:56.600 --> 00:01:00.880
<v Speaker 1>but what is believed in? What is design? And what

15
00:01:01.079 --> 00:01:05.120
<v Speaker 1>are the different interests hoping to get out of it?

16
00:01:05.159 --> 00:01:08.280
<v Speaker 1>So I guess in some what I want to use

17
00:01:08.719 --> 00:01:11.719
<v Speaker 1>LACON for is a weapon so that I feel like

18
00:01:11.920 --> 00:01:15.439
<v Speaker 1>a wizard standing outside of the fray, able to analyze

19
00:01:15.480 --> 00:01:21.840
<v Speaker 1>anyone else. So aside from weaponizing it against our ideological opponents,

20
00:01:21.879 --> 00:01:23.760
<v Speaker 1>what's the use of LACAN?

21
00:01:25.200 --> 00:01:28.920
<v Speaker 2>I always enjoy it. I think what'll be nice for

22
00:01:28.959 --> 00:01:32.599
<v Speaker 2>me is there was a time when originally the dissertation

23
00:01:32.719 --> 00:01:35.519
<v Speaker 2>that I finished a year ago was going to include

24
00:01:36.120 --> 00:01:38.519
<v Speaker 2>some Lacan stuff, but then I really ended up pivoting,

25
00:01:38.560 --> 00:01:41.599
<v Speaker 2>and you know, for just pragmatic reasons, and really I

26
00:01:41.680 --> 00:01:44.719
<v Speaker 2>just got focused way more on phenomenology, and I've kind

27
00:01:44.719 --> 00:01:49.200
<v Speaker 2>of been doing stuff that touches phenomenology, but sort of

28
00:01:49.239 --> 00:01:53.239
<v Speaker 2>my interest in psychoanalysis and Lacon in particular has fallen

29
00:01:53.280 --> 00:01:56.879
<v Speaker 2>a little bit off. So it's going to be nice

30
00:01:56.920 --> 00:02:00.200
<v Speaker 2>to just return for that reason, because it was something

31
00:02:00.280 --> 00:02:05.280
<v Speaker 2>that I originally wanted to include more in academic work

32
00:02:05.359 --> 00:02:08.120
<v Speaker 2>that I was doing before. So and in which case,

33
00:02:08.159 --> 00:02:12.479
<v Speaker 2>of course, will be you know, the political implications of

34
00:02:13.319 --> 00:02:16.479
<v Speaker 2>you know, psychoanalysis for democracy. I mean, I think at

35
00:02:16.520 --> 00:02:19.080
<v Speaker 2>the time, you guys kind of know what my you know,

36
00:02:19.199 --> 00:02:22.879
<v Speaker 2>critique of certain kinds of radical democracy is. And you know,

37
00:02:22.919 --> 00:02:25.199
<v Speaker 2>phenomenology is one way of talking about why I think

38
00:02:25.240 --> 00:02:28.120
<v Speaker 2>it's overly optimistic, but I feel like psychoanalysis could be

39
00:02:28.120 --> 00:02:31.240
<v Speaker 2>another way of talking about why it's overly optimistic.

40
00:02:31.360 --> 00:02:33.120
<v Speaker 1>Right, Like, if if the.

41
00:02:33.080 --> 00:02:36.680
<v Speaker 2>Subject is really as kind of messed up and vulnerable

42
00:02:36.719 --> 00:02:39.120
<v Speaker 2>as Lacon describes it, then like how could we ever

43
00:02:39.319 --> 00:02:43.800
<v Speaker 2>want radically horizontal democracy in a way or not so

44
00:02:43.879 --> 00:02:45.800
<v Speaker 2>much want, but how could we ever expect that to

45
00:02:45.840 --> 00:02:46.439
<v Speaker 2>be possible?

46
00:02:46.520 --> 00:02:52.000
<v Speaker 1>Basically speaking to the applicability, there's there's a sense because

47
00:02:52.000 --> 00:02:56.919
<v Speaker 1>we're not we're not psychoanalysis partisans. Some people will, I'm sure,

48
00:02:57.039 --> 00:02:59.719
<v Speaker 1>think it's the answer to everything, and I don't think

49
00:02:59.719 --> 00:03:03.240
<v Speaker 1>any of us do. But psychoanalysis does give you kind

50
00:03:03.280 --> 00:03:06.479
<v Speaker 1>of a sense of being a wizard completely outside of

51
00:03:06.520 --> 00:03:12.280
<v Speaker 1>the context, able to determine motivations, able to ascribe motivations

52
00:03:12.319 --> 00:03:15.319
<v Speaker 1>maybe to all these different actors. And there are some

53
00:03:15.520 --> 00:03:20.560
<v Speaker 1>problems with it as a method, like not not what

54
00:03:20.639 --> 00:03:23.400
<v Speaker 1>people say about Freud, for instance, like ow everything he's

55
00:03:23.400 --> 00:03:26.280
<v Speaker 1>written has been completely disproven, not going that far. But

56
00:03:26.360 --> 00:03:31.639
<v Speaker 1>there is an element even to lak On that's like unfalsifiable, right,

57
00:03:31.879 --> 00:03:34.759
<v Speaker 1>You would never be able to determine whether one interpretation

58
00:03:35.599 --> 00:03:39.240
<v Speaker 1>is correct and tested against another. And it's it's almost

59
00:03:39.280 --> 00:03:45.319
<v Speaker 1>a little more like like interpreting literature than than than

60
00:03:45.360 --> 00:03:48.240
<v Speaker 1>a science. I don't know, if you you had something.

61
00:03:48.039 --> 00:03:52.280
<v Speaker 3>To say, yeah, and inevitably no on just that point. Inevitably,

62
00:03:52.479 --> 00:03:55.199
<v Speaker 3>any time I returned to look on, which is always

63
00:03:55.240 --> 00:03:59.520
<v Speaker 3>fun to do, to the earlier point. Yes, I think

64
00:03:59.599 --> 00:04:03.120
<v Speaker 3>anything you're trying to look at or study or understand

65
00:04:03.319 --> 00:04:08.800
<v Speaker 3>can only benefit from incorporating psychoanalysis, either Freud or Lacan.

66
00:04:10.240 --> 00:04:15.919
<v Speaker 3>Anytime I returned to Lacan, I inevitably remember Chomsky's dis saying,

67
00:04:16.000 --> 00:04:19.439
<v Speaker 3>you know, Lacan is a perfectly self aware charlatan or

68
00:04:19.480 --> 00:04:24.279
<v Speaker 3>something like that, and it kind of bugs me. It

69
00:04:24.319 --> 00:04:27.879
<v Speaker 3>bugs me first that he would say that without giving

70
00:04:27.959 --> 00:04:30.759
<v Speaker 3>too much of a reason for it. I mean, I

71
00:04:31.399 --> 00:04:35.600
<v Speaker 3>know Chomsky is also a linguist and leftist intellectual and

72
00:04:35.639 --> 00:04:38.800
<v Speaker 3>an activist and an expert on Israeli Palestine and all

73
00:04:38.800 --> 00:04:39.800
<v Speaker 3>that stuff.

74
00:04:39.680 --> 00:04:41.959
<v Speaker 1>And a house guest of Jeffrey Epstein.

75
00:04:42.199 --> 00:04:47.759
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and he's really brilliant, has a disgusting memory, and

76
00:04:48.040 --> 00:04:52.720
<v Speaker 3>has debated Fuco and he's but then he has this quote,

77
00:04:52.759 --> 00:04:55.160
<v Speaker 3>and it always bugs me. There's actually a book then

78
00:04:55.279 --> 00:04:58.800
<v Speaker 3>I discovered on this return to Lacan called I didn't

79
00:04:58.800 --> 00:05:00.639
<v Speaker 3>get a chance to read it, but it's called Lacan

80
00:05:00.720 --> 00:05:04.439
<v Speaker 3>the Charlatan, and I think it's sort of refuting. I mean,

81
00:05:04.439 --> 00:05:07.319
<v Speaker 3>it sets out, I think, to refute these kinds of claims. Yeah,

82
00:05:07.319 --> 00:05:12.759
<v Speaker 3>by Peter Matthews. It was published in twenty twenty, and

83
00:05:12.839 --> 00:05:15.639
<v Speaker 3>it actually speaks to just this point. I think it says,

84
00:05:15.720 --> 00:05:18.639
<v Speaker 3>you know, this book sets out to determine the validity

85
00:05:18.680 --> 00:05:21.199
<v Speaker 3>of an accusation made against Chako La Khan by Noam

86
00:05:21.279 --> 00:05:25.639
<v Speaker 3>Chompsky in a nineteen eighty nine interview, so that I

87
00:05:25.720 --> 00:05:28.480
<v Speaker 3>actually really want to read that to see how he

88
00:05:28.759 --> 00:05:33.959
<v Speaker 3>refutes that claim that Lacan was just a charlatan, which

89
00:05:34.079 --> 00:05:37.079
<v Speaker 3>basically means like a snake oil salesman, like he was

90
00:05:37.160 --> 00:05:40.079
<v Speaker 3>just there to be famous. He was, he was faking it.

91
00:05:40.160 --> 00:05:42.160
<v Speaker 3>He was pulling the wool over all of our eyes.

92
00:05:42.759 --> 00:05:46.360
<v Speaker 3>It's so hard for me to square up my respect

93
00:05:46.399 --> 00:05:49.680
<v Speaker 3>for Chompsky with that dismissive statement.

94
00:05:50.399 --> 00:05:53.639
<v Speaker 1>All right, well, let's let's find an example then, because

95
00:05:54.040 --> 00:05:58.839
<v Speaker 1>mister smarty Pants or missus smarty Pants, well say something like, well,

96
00:05:58.959 --> 00:06:02.480
<v Speaker 1>Freud thought there was all this meaning to dreams, but

97
00:06:02.839 --> 00:06:06.639
<v Speaker 1>then we studied the brain or whatever in neurochemistry, and no,

98
00:06:06.839 --> 00:06:11.959
<v Speaker 1>these are actually just completely random synapses firing, and they think, well,

99
00:06:12.639 --> 00:06:17.800
<v Speaker 1>we've defeated the hypothesis that dreams have meaning. But really,

100
00:06:17.879 --> 00:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>like even Freud would say, Freud's like he says things

101
00:06:21.720 --> 00:06:25.199
<v Speaker 1>to the effect of, I'm not sure about the origins

102
00:06:25.319 --> 00:06:28.519
<v Speaker 1>or the physical causes of this stuff. I just know

103
00:06:28.639 --> 00:06:32.120
<v Speaker 1>that the effects have meaning that don't seem to come

104
00:06:32.160 --> 00:06:35.879
<v Speaker 1>from the physical origins. So with dreams, it actually makes

105
00:06:35.920 --> 00:06:41.399
<v Speaker 1>no difference whether dreams are random or whether they're memory processing.

106
00:06:42.000 --> 00:06:46.839
<v Speaker 1>What matters is that somehow, even unconscious or not unconsciously sorry,

107
00:06:46.879 --> 00:06:52.600
<v Speaker 1>in sleep, your brain assembles these into a kind of narrative,

108
00:06:52.639 --> 00:06:55.279
<v Speaker 1>which seems weird that it does that. And then the

109
00:06:55.279 --> 00:07:00.879
<v Speaker 1>implication to that is, well, is your brain turning signals

110
00:07:00.920 --> 00:07:05.199
<v Speaker 1>into narratives when you're awake then, because then the the

111
00:07:05.360 --> 00:07:09.439
<v Speaker 1>ego story that you have going about your life wouldn't

112
00:07:09.439 --> 00:07:12.959
<v Speaker 1>be the only story. And that's the same thing that

113
00:07:12.959 --> 00:07:18.160
<v Speaker 1>that Lecan says with some structuralism in there. I just

114
00:07:18.199 --> 00:07:20.800
<v Speaker 1>wanted to say, speaking of the other example, one example

115
00:07:20.839 --> 00:07:23.920
<v Speaker 1>is dreams. The other example is Freudian slip, because it's

116
00:07:23.920 --> 00:07:27.199
<v Speaker 1>the most common example people can ascribe to freud and

117
00:07:27.240 --> 00:07:30.399
<v Speaker 1>you go, well, no, Freudian slips, they're not They're not

118
00:07:30.879 --> 00:07:34.279
<v Speaker 1>indicative of some secret layer of meaning below the surface.

119
00:07:34.319 --> 00:07:35.959
<v Speaker 3>It's just random mistakes.

120
00:07:36.079 --> 00:07:39.800
<v Speaker 1>They're just random. And just like the dream thing, even

121
00:07:39.800 --> 00:07:42.040
<v Speaker 1>if they are random, that's not going to just.

122
00:07:42.000 --> 00:07:44.399
<v Speaker 3>Going faster than my mouth and I tried to say

123
00:07:44.399 --> 00:07:49.040
<v Speaker 3>two words the same time. That's that's the usual explanation.

124
00:07:49.199 --> 00:07:51.360
<v Speaker 3>That's the I'm in control explanation.

125
00:07:52.439 --> 00:07:57.199
<v Speaker 1>There was this week a monumental like a history changing

126
00:07:57.360 --> 00:08:01.279
<v Speaker 1>Freudian slip that I clocked, and no one else has

127
00:08:01.319 --> 00:08:03.399
<v Speaker 1>picked up on it yet, I don't think so this

128
00:08:03.519 --> 00:08:06.839
<v Speaker 1>is a this is an exclusive. It was Netanyahu on

129
00:08:06.959 --> 00:08:08.079
<v Speaker 1>his Fox interview.

130
00:08:08.680 --> 00:08:10.279
<v Speaker 2>Oh bb o bibe.

131
00:08:10.720 --> 00:08:13.720
<v Speaker 1>So he's getting interviewed and the interviewer says, so you're

132
00:08:13.839 --> 00:08:17.079
<v Speaker 1>taking control of the Gaza strip I guess right, And

133
00:08:17.399 --> 00:08:20.000
<v Speaker 1>in Netanyah, who's answer, I can actually clip to it here,

134
00:08:20.360 --> 00:08:23.439
<v Speaker 1>but in nten Yah whose answer he says, quote, I

135
00:08:23.519 --> 00:08:27.000
<v Speaker 1>want to or we want to enable the population to

136
00:08:27.079 --> 00:08:28.279
<v Speaker 1>be free of Gaza.

137
00:08:29.439 --> 00:08:32.919
<v Speaker 3>Enable the population to be free of Gaza. Well, Israel

138
00:08:33.080 --> 00:08:34.840
<v Speaker 3>take control of all of Gaza.

139
00:08:36.159 --> 00:08:40.960
<v Speaker 1>We intend to in order to assure our security, remove

140
00:08:41.000 --> 00:08:45.159
<v Speaker 1>hamas there, enable the population to be free of Gaza.

141
00:08:45.879 --> 00:08:48.600
<v Speaker 1>So we want to free them from their land that

142
00:08:48.720 --> 00:08:49.279
<v Speaker 1>they're on.

143
00:08:50.799 --> 00:08:55.919
<v Speaker 3>Wow, that's that's a very kind of uh freedom and

144
00:08:56.039 --> 00:08:56.799
<v Speaker 3>scare quotes.

145
00:08:57.360 --> 00:08:58.399
<v Speaker 2>Did he correct himself?

146
00:08:58.519 --> 00:09:01.480
<v Speaker 1>He did not correct himself. But some of the transcripts

147
00:09:01.519 --> 00:09:03.399
<v Speaker 1>put sick in brackets.

148
00:09:03.919 --> 00:09:07.200
<v Speaker 3>Sounds like sounds like he's had something on his mind there.

149
00:09:08.200 --> 00:09:10.759
<v Speaker 1>So anyway, if you're doing confirmation bias, of course you

150
00:09:10.799 --> 00:09:15.360
<v Speaker 1>can be like, well, this Freudian slip belies the genocidal intent.

151
00:09:15.720 --> 00:09:18.039
<v Speaker 1>But of course that's not even how Freud meant for

152
00:09:18.080 --> 00:09:22.240
<v Speaker 1>Freudian slips to work. What a Freudian slip is, it's

153
00:09:22.639 --> 00:09:26.600
<v Speaker 1>just to say that, yeah, we consider ourselves and our

154
00:09:26.639 --> 00:09:30.879
<v Speaker 1>speech and our person our ego to have this dominant narrative.

155
00:09:31.159 --> 00:09:35.360
<v Speaker 1>The dominant narrative is what we intend primarily by speech,

156
00:09:35.399 --> 00:09:39.080
<v Speaker 1>and it comes out in this line. And just the

157
00:09:39.120 --> 00:09:42.039
<v Speaker 1>fact that that line can be interrupted, or the fact

158
00:09:42.120 --> 00:09:45.639
<v Speaker 1>that you can make mistakes in speech, that doesn't belie

159
00:09:45.679 --> 00:09:50.879
<v Speaker 1>a whole secret layer where your mind is conniving against you.

160
00:09:50.960 --> 00:09:52.679
<v Speaker 1>That's not what it means at all. What it means

161
00:09:52.759 --> 00:09:56.320
<v Speaker 1>is there's more than when speech in speech, there's more

162
00:09:56.360 --> 00:10:00.480
<v Speaker 1>than one quote unquote speaker in speech. The fact that

163
00:10:00.480 --> 00:10:05.000
<v Speaker 1>you can make mistakes is very important because that means

164
00:10:05.039 --> 00:10:08.440
<v Speaker 1>that all of language is like a mistake waiting to happen,

165
00:10:08.519 --> 00:10:10.960
<v Speaker 1>a potential mistake. You can always be missing the mark

166
00:10:11.000 --> 00:10:12.879
<v Speaker 1>of what you're trying to say, even if you say

167
00:10:12.879 --> 00:10:15.720
<v Speaker 1>what you intended to say, can be misinterpreted. It just

168
00:10:15.840 --> 00:10:18.960
<v Speaker 1>means that there's multiple discourses in a single discourse. And

169
00:10:19.000 --> 00:10:22.879
<v Speaker 1>that's kind of an important introduction to this book, the

170
00:10:23.200 --> 00:10:24.480
<v Speaker 1>Lacadian subject.

171
00:10:24.519 --> 00:10:27.600
<v Speaker 2>Well, he talks about ego talk and some other kind

172
00:10:27.639 --> 00:10:29.919
<v Speaker 2>of talk which I like, which I like that, And

173
00:10:29.960 --> 00:10:33.799
<v Speaker 2>he says, and ego talk is just everyday talk about

174
00:10:33.840 --> 00:10:37.120
<v Speaker 2>what we consciously think and believe about ourselves. Basically, everything

175
00:10:37.159 --> 00:10:41.759
<v Speaker 2>that common sensically a person thinks is like themselves and

176
00:10:41.799 --> 00:10:44.879
<v Speaker 2>their thoughts is ego talk. And then what he's interested

177
00:10:44.879 --> 00:10:48.399
<v Speaker 2>in is some other kind of talk, right, the.

178
00:10:48.399 --> 00:10:53.279
<v Speaker 3>Other which originates elsewhere. That's the idea. They have two

179
00:10:53.279 --> 00:10:59.080
<v Speaker 3>different origins, Like ego talk originates in your consciousness, in

180
00:10:59.120 --> 00:11:02.600
<v Speaker 3>what you think of as your consciously controlled flow of mind,

181
00:11:02.639 --> 00:11:06.720
<v Speaker 3>whatever you're thinking about, and then there's the other, this

182
00:11:06.879 --> 00:11:10.559
<v Speaker 3>other place that the other kind of talk comes from.

183
00:11:11.080 --> 00:11:16.840
<v Speaker 3>And that that other places is of course the I

184
00:11:16.879 --> 00:11:19.840
<v Speaker 3>wouldn't I don't want to jump to saying it's the unconscious,

185
00:11:19.879 --> 00:11:24.399
<v Speaker 3>but it's the other place is a kind of internalized

186
00:11:24.600 --> 00:11:29.679
<v Speaker 3>language system that we call the unconscious. So if you're

187
00:11:29.720 --> 00:11:32.559
<v Speaker 3>trying to convince somebody, say, you're not always in control

188
00:11:32.720 --> 00:11:36.039
<v Speaker 3>of your own discourse, right there, there is some other

189
00:11:36.159 --> 00:11:39.840
<v Speaker 3>discourse that comes out through you, and it comes out

190
00:11:39.879 --> 00:11:45.759
<v Speaker 3>through you. We can best see it in things like dreams, jokes,

191
00:11:45.879 --> 00:11:49.720
<v Speaker 3>slips of the tongue. Those are three like things that

192
00:11:49.960 --> 00:11:54.519
<v Speaker 3>show that there's some other kind of discourse or other

193
00:11:54.639 --> 00:11:59.960
<v Speaker 3>discourses besides your ego discourse, besides your ego talk, clamoring

194
00:12:00.919 --> 00:12:05.440
<v Speaker 3>for attention. Let's say so to jokes, jokes, and slips

195
00:12:05.440 --> 00:12:07.320
<v Speaker 3>of the tongue, I mean slips of the tongue. Yeah,

196
00:12:07.480 --> 00:12:11.240
<v Speaker 3>prove it like in a way, you know, it's saying

197
00:12:11.639 --> 00:12:16.440
<v Speaker 3>saying something you didn't mean to say, and then it's

198
00:12:16.519 --> 00:12:18.879
<v Speaker 3>like a weirdly kind of you try to dismiss it

199
00:12:19.000 --> 00:12:21.000
<v Speaker 3>as you know, that was just a mistake. I didn't

200
00:12:21.039 --> 00:12:24.720
<v Speaker 3>really mean anything else. I meant to say this. And

201
00:12:25.000 --> 00:12:28.440
<v Speaker 3>and of course Freud's response is the truth, the truth

202
00:12:28.440 --> 00:12:32.159
<v Speaker 3>has spoken. But even in that case, it's not necessarily

203
00:12:32.200 --> 00:12:34.639
<v Speaker 3>something that's like more true about you, like you've just

204
00:12:34.720 --> 00:12:38.480
<v Speaker 3>accidentally said a deeper truth about yourself. It could be

205
00:12:38.519 --> 00:12:42.159
<v Speaker 3>some truth the other's truth, right, it's something that came

206
00:12:42.200 --> 00:12:44.600
<v Speaker 3>from that other place that wasn't yours, but it came

207
00:12:44.639 --> 00:12:47.440
<v Speaker 3>out of your mouth, or it mixed up a word

208
00:12:47.960 --> 00:12:51.759
<v Speaker 3>replaced a word with another word, or combine two different

209
00:12:51.759 --> 00:12:55.480
<v Speaker 3>words together and it comes out as this weird word

210
00:12:55.559 --> 00:13:00.279
<v Speaker 3>like schmocker stick or something, and it's it's some other truth. Still,

211
00:13:00.320 --> 00:13:03.519
<v Speaker 3>it's not like a deeper truth about you necessarily, but

212
00:13:03.879 --> 00:13:08.639
<v Speaker 3>it shows this alienation in language that is all of

213
00:13:08.639 --> 00:13:12.000
<v Speaker 3>our human condition, and that's that's what it's supposed to show.

214
00:13:12.000 --> 00:13:15.159
<v Speaker 3>There's we're alienated from ourselves.

215
00:13:15.960 --> 00:13:18.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think I think we both kind of address

216
00:13:18.320 --> 00:13:21.759
<v Speaker 1>the same point here that the common misconception is that

217
00:13:21.840 --> 00:13:26.960
<v Speaker 1>the Freudian slip or the dream, what these things have

218
00:13:27.559 --> 00:13:32.879
<v Speaker 1>secret access to is a deeper truth, the deeper core

219
00:13:33.000 --> 00:13:37.120
<v Speaker 1>of your personality inside inside some kind of stupid inception

220
00:13:37.639 --> 00:13:41.000
<v Speaker 1>model that the truth is closer to the middle. And

221
00:13:41.039 --> 00:13:44.600
<v Speaker 1>that's not true here because like you don't you don't

222
00:13:44.679 --> 00:13:48.639
<v Speaker 1>know what the slip was. It might be slipping into

223
00:13:49.200 --> 00:13:52.240
<v Speaker 1>your mother's words, or maybe not even your mother's actual

224
00:13:52.279 --> 00:13:55.679
<v Speaker 1>words that you've remembered, but what you think your mother

225
00:13:55.799 --> 00:13:58.679
<v Speaker 1>said about you on some occasion. So it's not like

226
00:13:58.759 --> 00:14:00.720
<v Speaker 1>it's a deeper truth. And this is part of the

227
00:14:00.759 --> 00:14:03.919
<v Speaker 1>reason why psychoanalysis in this way, when it comes to

228
00:14:03.960 --> 00:14:10.039
<v Speaker 1>the other it's not reproducible because there's no one certain origin.

229
00:14:10.200 --> 00:14:13.840
<v Speaker 1>If if Freudian slips were just revealing your true intentions,

230
00:14:14.120 --> 00:14:17.440
<v Speaker 1>then you would say, oh, the core personality, the true

231
00:14:17.480 --> 00:14:22.120
<v Speaker 1>personality is closer to the middle of you underneath this viniar.

232
00:14:22.279 --> 00:14:25.200
<v Speaker 1>But the point of this psychoanalysis is like the unconscious

233
00:14:25.840 --> 00:14:29.440
<v Speaker 1>is a is a S, and there's not There's not

234
00:14:29.559 --> 00:14:33.799
<v Speaker 1>one solid real version of yourself in that sea. There's

235
00:14:33.840 --> 00:14:36.039
<v Speaker 1>a bunch of versions of a bunch of others.