From now on, I openly took the side of Freud

The most fruitful period of my inner life came when
how I became a psychiatrist. I started researching mental illness, their external
without the existence of any bias. As a result I was able
to deal with such mental processes, the nature of which struck me:
I realized that in essence they never tried to delve into them just
classified as "pathological". With time I focused my
attention to cases in which, as was believed to be able to understand; it
were paranoia, manic-depressive psychosis and psychogenic disorders. With
the work of Breuer and Freud, I became acquainted very early in my
mental activity, and along with the works of Pierre Jean they were
extremely useful to me. First of all, I found that the basic
principles and methods of Freudian dream interpretation exclusively
fruitful and is able to explain schizophrenic behavior.
"Interpretation of dreams" Freud I read in 1900. Then I put
the book aside, as he did not understand her. I was 25 years old, and I haven't
have enough experience to rate the value of the theory of Freud. This happened later. In
1903, I again took up the "Interpretation of dreams" and realized how
the ideas of Freud close to my own. Mainly I was interested in so
called "displacement mechanism" borrowed by Freud from psychology
neurosis and used in the interpretation of dreams. The importance of it I
appreciated immediately. After all, in their associative tests, I was often met with
reactions of this kind: the patient could not find the answer to something or other
a stimulating a word or hesitated more than usual. Then it was found that
such anomalies occur whenever stimulating words affect
or some painful mental conflict zone. Patients usually
didn't realize this and my question about the reason for difficulties usually gave
very strange, and even unnatural responses. From "dream Interpretation" I
found that there is a mechanism of displacement and what I observed
the phenomena are consistent with Freudian theory. Thus, I would like
supported Freudian arguments.
 Otherwise, what exactly was "forced out", here I didn't agree with
Freud. He saw the reasons of displacement only in sexual trauma. However, in
my practice, I often observed the neuroses, in which sex played
not a major role, and on the fore very different
factors: the difficulties of social adaptation, depression due to the tragic
circumstances, the concepts of prestige, etc. Subsequently, I have repeatedly cited
Freud's example in similar cases, but he pretended not to notice any other
causes but sexual. I had been fundamentally disagree with this.
 At first I could not clearly define, what is the place of Freud in
my life, and find the right tone in a relationship with him. Discovering it
works for the first time, I started to do research and finishing work
which was contributing to my advancement in the University. Freud
was, no doubt, persona non grata in the then academic
the world, and every mention of it wore scandalous. "Great peace
this" talked about him furtively, at conferences arguing about it only in
the sidelines and never in public. So the coincidence of my results with
conclusions Freud did not promise me anything good.
 Once, when I was working, not otherwise, how the devil whispered to me that it is possible
to publish the results of my experiments and my findings, without mentioning the name
Freud. In the end, I got these results long before I realized
the value of his theory. But then began my second "I". "If you will
look, I don't know about Freud, it would be deliberate deception. You cannot build a life
on lies". From now on, I openly took the side of Freud.
 The first time I spoke in his defense at the Congress in Munich, where he discussed
obsessional neurosis, and where the name Freud persistently avoided even to mention. In 1906
year I wrote an article for  the Munich medical weekly about
Freudian theory of neurosis, which substantially deepened the understanding
obsessional neurosis. After that I received warning letters from two
German professors. "If You wrote them, will continue
to intercede for Freud, it is unlikely You will be able to rely on academic
a career". I replied: "If what Freud says, the truth is I'm with him. What
is career that you want to build, limiting and suppressing research
the facts," and continued to side with Freud. But my results
still contrary to the assertions of Freud, all the neuroses caused
exclusively repressed sexuality or related emotional
injuries. Sometimes it is, but not always. However, Freud has opened up new avenues for
research, and to deny this is, in my opinion, was absurd. [In 1906,
after Jung sent Freud a letter about the results of their associative
experiments, they began a lively correspondence that lasted until
1913. In 1907, Jung sent Freud his work "the Psychology of dementia
leesah". - ed.]