This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Interpretation of Dreams article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On Dreams (Freud) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 July 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into The Interpretation of Dreams. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Is not for posting account of your dreams. It is not a place to have dreams interpreted. It is a discussion page for an encyclopedia article about a specific book about dream interpretation written by Sigmund Freud in 1899. --Fastfission 02:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
"These approaches have been largely abandoned in favor of more comprehensive methods." Such as? This sentence needs to mention few of those methods, otherwise it's empty statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.202.79.73 (talk) 13:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
No mention of Frued's shorter version of this work, On Dreams? According to the back of the book, "Aware that his Interpretation of Dreams was a long and difficult book, Frued decided that he must offer a version that would be briefer and easier to follow." There doesn't seem to be mention of this short work anywhere on Wikipedia, and I would think that it would be worthy of mention here. RobertM525 (talk) 21:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
in freaud dream interpretations the web have not included the dreams of the freud. and explain the freud dreams in others psychoanalytical perspective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.52.144.114 (talk) 10:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
dreamed that someone you loved was not in our house Aozb his belongings and put them in a bag and a gap uncomfortable very people of the house and acting nervously at the same time I attended our girl claims to be his fiancée and he broke off his engagement has been handed over to the tribunal to try him, she says, I do not know why he did so, and I was shocked because this person was supposed to Alhakikhan Ikhtabna was Aoill his belongings in a bag back to us I thought he steal our purposes and was upset because he left his fiancée, but will not be retrieved ......
..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.127.86.121 (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
On french newspaper (http://www.marianne.net/Freud-a-echappe-a-Elisabeth-Roudinesco_a241998.html): during the first eight years (1899 1907) he sold 75 copies per year only 600). Does someone there has a solid source other than French for this ?--G de gonjasufi (talk) 01:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
My removal was reverted With edit summary: "You have provided no evidence that it is trivial and no evidence that he is "non-notable", which is, in any case, completely irelevant". My rationale was "P:TRIVIA: trivial opinion of a nonnotable psychoanalyst do not belong here"
Please explain why my edit was unconstructive. I removed redundant piece irrelevant to understanding of the text. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on The Interpretation of Dreams and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. |
Greetings, Staszek Lem and FreeKnowledgeCreator! I've read through the discussion here as well as the text of the article itself. I assume we are talking strictly about including the name of the reference work in-text, and not about the entire passage? It seems the two of you have already come to an agreement about the passage itself. Please let me know if I have misinterpreted this. |
The "contents" section seems like a stub because it only describes the first chapter, and I believe it is misleading.
I find the following sentence misleading in the context and the way it is written: "Freud describes three main types of dreams: 1. Direct prophecies received in the dream (chrematismos, oraculum); 2. The foretelling of a future event (orama, visio) 3. The symbolic dream, which requires interpretation (Interpretation of Dreams 5)."
The way this is written, I don't think it's clear to the reader that Freud is critiquing others' methods of interpreting dreams; at first, I read this as those main types of dreams are how Freud interprets dreams.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Freud's theory was that dreams are prophecies.
65.78.3.218 (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Frederick Crews, "Freud: The Making of an Illusion" (2017). This extremely detailed and forensically researched book shows conclusively, among other things, that Freud in fact had no patients before writing "Interpretation", and also that by that time he had been addicted to cocaine for many years. All these stories of dreams were made up to "prove" a thesis which he had concocted beforehand. Justification for mentioning this here is that the tone of the article is otherwise the typical reverential junk that Freud and his fantasies have attracted since this first best-seller which kicked off the whole scam pseudo-science. 81.187.58.246 (talk) 15:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
i was dreaming my self cleaning the house and taking everything out 41.223.141.85 (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)