Report Safeanew's Profile


Anime Stats
Days: 162.8
Mean Score: 5.51
  • Total Entries406
  • Rewatched0
  • Episodes9,764
Anime History Last Anime Updates
Sep 11, 4:19 AM
Watching 10/12 · Scored 7
May 28, 6:56 AM
Completed 12/12 · Scored 6
Tenpou Ibun: Ayakashi Ayashi
Tenpou Ibun: Ayakashi Ayashi
Apr 5, 5:20 AM
Completed 25/25 · Scored 10
Manga Stats
Days: 0.0
Mean Score: 0.00
  • Total Entries0
  • Reread0
  • Chapters0
  • Volumes0
Manga History Last Manga Updates

No updates yet.


All Comments (306) Comments

Would you like to post a comment? Please login or sign up first!
GhostOutOfShell_ Sep 7, 2:48 PM
I need a little time to familiarize myself with the text, since i have not read this one yet, give me a day or two, i will hit you back with my thoughts then.
GhostOutOfShell_ Sep 7, 8:05 AM
I would enjoy discussing things so i am all in for that, i am one of those weirdos that likes to debate and discuss things in their spare time. Do you have any topics in mind we could start with?
GhostOutOfShell_ Sep 6, 10:55 AM
Yeah i think, i get the role of the Father in both Lacan and Freud. Though in Freud Father is kinda literal in Lacan Father is symbolic, like you say it's the big Other, which can be also non literal Father. It's the symbol of Father, which is an interest of mother and takes/splits mothers attention. Basically Father is big other from child perspective and object a petit from mothers perspective. Like my point is in Lacan (More precise later stages of Lacans thought.) you don't need an actual father in everyday sense of this word to have a father in symbolic, many things can play a role of it, it just has to limit mothers power and by her object of desire i.e. take away her attention. Darian Leader (Don't know if you are familiar with him, he is a founder of "Centre for Freudian Analysis and Research") explains this really well in "What is Madness" I can try to look for quotes on my notes of this if you interested.

I get that, though calling yourself Lacanian still assumes Freudian roots and distances from Jung, it's just grater level of description.
I mean most education type of things are not beginner friendly, though i see no point in making it even more confusing. Like Phenomenology is even more difficult when you have Husserl and Hegel mean almost completely different things by it.

Like think about someone interested in psychoanalysis and hearing people using Freudian label my get an interested into that, than take a look at Freud, see his half done theories many of which are fairly bad for today standard and though that's all there is. In general i think people should bring up Lacan much more when talking about psychoanalysis as imo that's the best we can offer. It's like mentioning Hegel when talking about idealism, you now Plato seems stupid by today standards for people you have no historical perspective.

I personally don't mind you using Freudian label and i do understand why, i think Lacanian label is more helpful to make people take psychoanalysis more seriously though. I value Freud quite a bit, but is in the same way as I value Plato.

I would say Freud had the right intuition, Lacan actually developed them and made them work.

I have seen this video before, I am really big on Z (As i am both a leftist and interested in psychoanalysis, also i do appreciate Hegel quite a bit) and have watched most of his stuff that one can find on youtube and read a few of his books.
GhostOutOfShell_ Sep 5, 5:08 PM
Yeah i got you, I think Lacanian school of though is closest post-freud school of psychoanalysis to Freud himself. Though I think it serves nothing for any Lacanians to calm themselves Freudian as their though has many difference and gets confusing for people not used to these things.

Another thing is people who follow some ideology usually call themselves based on that, later when they add to it or change that new ideology gets named after them. Like Lenin call himself Marxist, now we consider his though Leninist. Same with Freud and Lacan, it's easier to communicate that way. Since if you would say to me that you are Freudian, Freuds ideas would be first association, not Lacan's.

I don't know how much i agree with Lacan standing with Freuds idea of father. Whit year what Father meant in oedipus complex for Lacan evolved a lot, like a institution can take the role of father, as father is defined by mothers desire. By castration you mean oedipus complex i suppose, well it evolves in Lacan as well, there is no threat of father like in Freud, for Lacan it's more like establishing separation of things through symbolic if i understood it correctly.

I agree that unlike many other Lacan didn't reject Freuds theories, though he evolved and reworked them so far that it's hard to call it same thing.

Also, nice to meet you. ^^
-Rica- Jul 29, 3:26 AM
Radically free does not mean innovative, rather it is about it's negativity of it's purpose, if he as you say only wanted to make enjoyable music, then his music loses to the most enjoyable music, or the most enjoyable thing.
To be enjoyable is a positive purpose, radical freedom in art is to do something without such a clear purpose.

I'll be honest, I don't really understand that. :/ What do you mean by negativity and positive and unclear purposes and how does radical freedom relate to those concepts, and is radical freedom about having a negative purpose or an unclear purpose?

If they only serve to be pleasent then they are craftmaship or design, as in devoid of the free artistic thinking of art.

As an artist myself, I don't really see how such a distinction makes sense in any way. I don't know yet which specific works of art you consider art, but I can make a few guesses. If I am right in my guessing, then I can honestly say that there's no significant difference between what you consider art and not-art. If art is only art if it's not merely pleasant, there is plenty of very uncreative, boring and insignificant art that is art and a huge amount of amazing, beautiful and intricate art that is not art.

We are talking about art, classics are only examples of art, and the ability of art to become a classic tend to show that it is radically free in the sense that I am implying.

That's not really true though, is it? There are plenty of works of art that are not considered classics despite being quite "unpleasant" and strange (Ryoji Ikeda, Peter Brötzmann, Aube) and plenty of art considered classics despite being quite pleasant and not much more than that. (the aforementioned Sonatas, plenty of popular music like Spandau Ballet's "True," Beethoven's "Für Elise")
traed Jul 19, 8:53 AM
Rational Egoism is a specific philosophy so I was a bit at loss what you meant. There is three kinds of Egoist philosophy.

I call universals practical objectivity usually since it's closest we can get to objective morals from subjectivity so might as well call it objective because perhaps there is an underlying force causing that to be the case if that's what you mean. Not sure how that could apply to other things since I have to use other terms. Ideas are real things to me in that they not only shape perception of reality but create reality through observation and actions though thoughts themselves are technically actions just happening on a small scale. I like to think of the mind as the first dimention of timespace.

I don't think timespace is entirely a construct. It's relativity doesn't make it have no form. If anything it could be considered to lie between object and phantasm because it's kind of both.
llimdaert_hpue Jul 12, 5:17 AM
Society expects one to enjoy oneself, find meaning in things and to be one's true self.
One feel guilty when one cannot do that, that leads one to do it more and feel even more guilty.
The more one enjoys the more guilty one becomes.
True freedom is to be ok with being bored, that some things one do are meaningless and that one cannot be one's true self, because there is no true self, just an empty hole.

I agree with the first and last statements but I'm not sure one necessarily feels guilty.
Marc_----- Apr 21, 3:09 AM
Manaban Apr 16, 8:39 AM
Fair enough. Just kind of a bit protective of my friends list because I like using the stats page, but I've seen you around enough on AD :P
Manaban Apr 16, 6:35 AM
Why are you sending me a friend request?
Peaceful_Critic Mar 21, 3:29 PM
Just letting you know I added more to my most recent comment to you on the objective thread.
H_Lightstone Mar 15, 9:07 PM
Funny profile. XD
zieek Mar 1, 6:16 AM
Happy Grandma Marta Day, its a holiday we celebrate in my country, on the 1st of March.

Peaceful_Critic Feb 9, 1:30 PM
What are you studying?
Marc_----- Jan 24, 10:46 PM
You'll probably say to me next that Aura Battlers are super robots since they're powered by the pilot's life force. Since it isn't based on hard sci-fi (hardly is, since it's a fantasy).
Yes, I will keep being autistic about this topic