When we think of Sigmund Freud, we usually come to mind the figure of a pioneer in psychoanalysis, with his revolutionary theory over the unconscious and the structure of the human personality. However, it is important to remember that Freud did not work alone; He led a group of followers and colleagues who shared their ideas but also had their own perspectives and criticism.
As psychoanalytic movement grew, internal differences naturally emerged. These disagreements not only reflected the complexities of Freudian theory, but also the unique personalities and experiences of each group member. In this article, we will explore some of the first internal differences in the Freud group and how they shaped the course ofpsychoanalysis.
Introduction to the Vienna Circle
The Vienna Circle, also known as the Psychoanalytic Society of Vienna, was the cradle of the psychoanalytic movement. Founded by Freud in 1908, this society gathered doctors, psychologists and intellectuals interested in the theory and practice of psychoanalysis. The group included figures such as Carl Jung, Alfred Adler and Otto Rank, each with his own approach and interpretation of Freud’s ideas.
The dynamics of the Vienna circle was intense and stimulating, with heated debates and throbbing discussions. Although friendship and mutual respect were palpable, theoretical and personal differences began to emerge, sowing the first disagreements within the group.
Carl Jung’s departure
One of the main divergence points came up with Carl Jung, which was initially seen as Freud’s natural successor. However, Jung began to develop his own theories about the collective unconscious and archetypes, which diverged significantly from Freud’s ideas. The relationship between the two began to deteriorate, culminating in Jung’s exit from the Vienna circle in 1913.
Jung’s departure was a blow to Freud, not only because a friend and ally lasts, but also because he saw a threat to the unity and purity of psychoanalytic theory. However, this divergence also allowed psychoanalysis to diversify and evolve, paving the way for new perspectives and approaches.
Alfred Adler’s contributions
Alfred Adler, another prominent member of the Vienna circle, brought a unique perspective to psychoanalysis. While Freud focused on the role of unconscious and sexuality in personality formation, Adler emphasized the importance of socialization and the feeling of inferiority. His ideas on “individual psychology” highlighted the need to consider the social context and the pursuit of meaning and purpose in the individual’s life.
Adler’s contributions were initially well received by Freud, who saw in them a valuable complementation to his own theory. However, over time, the differences between the two became more apparent, leading Adler to found his own school of thought, known as “individual psychology.”
The implications of divergences for modern psychoanalysis
The first internal differences in Freud’s group had a profound impact on the evolution of psychoanalysis. They demonstrated that theory was not static, but dynamic and subject to revisions and criticism. In addition, these disagreements allowed different approaches and perspectives to emerge, enriching the field of psychoanalysis and making it more diverse and inclusive.
Nowadays, we can see the marks of these differences in the variety of schools and psychoanalytic approaches that exist. From Jung’s analytical psychology to Adler’s individual psychology, each of these currents reflects a different facet from Freudian theory, adapted and modified to meet contemporary needs and contexts.
In short, the first internal differences in Freud’s group were a crucial moment in the history of psychoanalysis. Not only did they reflect the complexities and nuances of Freudian theory, but also paved the way for the diversification and evolution of the field. By recognizing and appreciating these differences, we can better understand the richness and complexity of modern psychoanalysis.
