Talk:Repression (psychoanalysis)

Suppression
Psychological suppression needs an article, it links to censorship! -Unsigned
 * Should some mention be made (perhaps a separate article) of 'repression' in terms of cultural what-not? Such as suppressing the sexual urge, thinking it wholly 'naughty'? -Unsigned

Re: Help
The tags on top of the article tell the reader to get involved, to help with all kind of things such as spelling, grammar, usage, tone, style, voice, citations etc etc. Well, this reader would love to help but first he'd have to know what this repression thing is all about. A defense mechanism that allows you to stuff unpleasant fantasies into the subconscious? Great, but how do you go about getting a subconscious in the first place? The article mentions Sigmund Freud. So I looked up what he has to say on the subject. No help there. Mr Freud says that there is no such thing as a "subconscious", and that anyone who thinks that there is, ought to have his head examined. Well he says it a bit more politely, but not much. But who knows, the authors of the article may have a different Sigmund Freud in mind, not the old Professor from Vienna but perhaps some Ziggy Freud from the Bronx. Everything possible. - Anyway, can anybody help? --BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 09:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Detrimental
I just realized that we don't have to bother at all about the "subconscious". Repression, the article tells us, is an unconscious mechanism. That must mean, of course, that once you have it in place, everything will take care of itself automatically. The unpleasant fantasies will be headed off at the pass, so to say, and will land in the "subconscious" to be '"held and subdued" there without you even becoming aware of them. I'd give anything to have such a defense mechanism. What I don't understand is how anybody can call such a wonderful thing detrimental. --BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 10:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thought suppression
But even people like me who don't have an unconscious repression mechanism will not have to go out in the world without proper armor. For us there is thought suppression, which is entirely conscious and can be managed. Thus, the article tells us, there's never much of a danger that we might one day give in to an impulse to "choke the life out of some idiot who desperately needs it". A good thing, no doubt, but it would even be better if we could use this mechanism to suppress the impulses in the mind of the idiots who want to choke the life out of us. Well, you can't have everything. --BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 09:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Stages
In the Primary Repression phase, the article tells us, the infant learns that some aspects of reality are pleasant, and others are unpleasant, and that some are controllable, and others not. Well, that's exactly what my Hector learned as a puppy. And at the end of this phase, he was able to distinguish between desires, fears, self, and others. Exactly like the child mentioned in the article. What's more, all dog owners I know confirm that their dogs have gone through these stages. The phenomenon is also well documented in literature, so if anybody is planning to add a subsection on Repression and Dogs, he'll find ample source material. --BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 09:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Repression
IMHO supression and repression are of the same nature, and the end result is the same: a manifestation of sympotms that will express the deep inner nature of the hi christions i'm an un wanted klan baby hindu i dont like your chist mass stop taking other sacriments and brian washing i ring the beell myself if someone wasnt there stopping jp2 when he did that was tippically biger than the pope. -Unsigned

Removed text

 * Normal psychological repression, on the other hand, is a universal quality of personality and perception, and is required for proper development to take place. In this context, repression is sometimes spoken of in two stages of personality development, which are progressively involved in the creation of the individual's sense of "self" and "other", of "good" and "bad", and of the aspects of personality called "ego" and "superego".

It's unclear that this passage is referring to something different than the repressed memories of the earlier section, and if not they it is contradictory. It uses Freudian terms, which I'm unconvinced represents a theory that has any support from modern science. Also, it is unreferenced and was tagged as vague. -- Beland 18:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: the degree of support from contemporary science should not be a factor in considering whether material appears in an encyclopedic article or not. The term, especially in its Freudian manifestations, has a history that is as important as any claim to scientific verification. The lack of a citation, on the other hand, is a reasonable criterion. DionysosProteus 14:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposal to merge with Repressed memory

 * Disagree. The general concept of psychological repression does not necessarily include memories. The most common use of this word in psychology is "repressed emotions."  While all part of the mechanism of repression, it should have this article to describe the mechanism from a more generic standpoint.  Repression its self is a healthy, appropriate and necessary skill for coping and appropriate social and interpersonal behavior (e.g., adhering to social norms).  Pathology occurs when its use outlives its usefulness causing harm to emotional, physical, and interpersonal function.  This can even be the case when social norms are all or part of the problem.  Daniel Santos (talk) 21:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Disagree. Psychodynamic theory and memory processing are different conceptual and empirical domains. They should not be merged. 69.205.232.64 (talk) 22:26, 14 June 2008 (UTC)Quillbanger
 * Strongly support merging Repressed memory with this article. This article has the more umbrella-term name, and even though psychodynamic and other approaches are indeed "different" from one another, they are not so conceptually distinct as to preclude a merge of two short articles about them. Besides, neither article is called "memory processing"; we're talking strictly about repression. And both articles mention both Freud and more cognitively-oriented thinkers, so I'd say that the second of the two arguments above, while appreciated, is moot. Cosmic Latte (talk) 13:08, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I tend to opposethis - one is a Freudian defence mechanism, and the other a more modern specific issue to do with recovered memory, though there are similarities. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral stance for lack of info on both, but has this vote been resolved yet? It's been half a year. I think we should clarify, is this proposed merge a mergeTo or mergeFrom and which is on which end? Tyciol (talk) 22:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Doubt about Repression

 * Despite the tradition of citing articles that actually do not prove repression, articles that can be explained by normal memory mechanisms, there still is no compelling scientific support for repression. There is also no evidence that "repression is a major cause of mental illness." This is a truly, truly dreadful wiki entry.  For a full review of the evidence see McNally's scientific review of the data: in his 2003 book Remembering Trauma.  Edits please: the misinformation on this wiki page could damage peoples lives.
 * While the concept of repressed traumatic memories might not sit well in the scientific literature, the notion of repression used in much of this article has more to do with repressed desire. (And, in fact, the article as it currently stands seems rather clear on that.) You should probably read up on how exactly the word is being used before you accuse the article of "damag[ing] peoples [sic] lives." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.100.197.179 (talk) 05:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed changes:Freud's theory
I propose adding a section setting out Freud's theory of repression, citing both primary and secondary sources.

If this is acceptable, I would hope to add sources for (and perhaps reshape) the two unreferenced sections of the article.

I look forward to feeback before proceeding Jacobisq (talk) 10:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Theres not a lot of activity here. I should just give it a week say for feedback and if no response do it anyway. --Penbat (talk) 11:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good-oh, thanks Jacobisq (talk) 10:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

An oversight of the mess
Articles with overlapping content and their respective sections:

Repressed memory
 * History / Research / Hypothesis / Controversy / Legal issues / Recovered memory therapy (with referral to the main article)

Psychological repression
 * Freud's theory / Later developments / Related concepts: repressed memories

Recovered memory
 * Authenticity / Medico-legal issues / Neurological basis of memory / Amnesia / Effects of trauma on memory / Professional organisations

Recovered-memory therapy
 * Terminology / Research / Professional guidelines / Legal issues

False memory syndrome
 * Definition / Recovered memory therapy (with referral to the main article) / Evidence for / Court cases

Overlapping sections
Legal issues/Medico-legal issues/Court cases
 * → False memory syndrome
 * → Recovered-memory therapy
 * → Repressed memory

Controversy/Authenticity (of recovered memories)/Research (about recovered memories)
 * → Repressed memory
 * → Recovered memory
 * → False memory syndrome

Evidence for (the existence of false memories in general)/Neurological basis of memory
 * → Recovered memory
 * → False memory syndrome

Hypothesis/Effects of trauma on memory
 * → Repressed memory
 * → Recovered memory

If you I missed a significant overlap, please create a new discussion topic to discuss this there.

Vote

 * Vote for each of these topics which article should be their main article.


 * Vote per topic whether the topics in the other articles should
 * (a) have a brief summary and a referral to the main article, or
 * (b) be referred to in the See Also section.


 * And please vote yes or no to adding info-tags to the respective talk pages outlining the results of this vote.

To keep things central, please cast your vote at Talk:Repressed memory.

JGM73 (talk) 01:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 03:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)