Historical background of this from the point of view of modern psychology.

After the second meeting in Vienna, I began to understand the conceptpower
Alfred Adler, which I thought was worth sharing. Adler
every "son" has taken over from his father not what he said, and the fact that the
did. Now I have discovered the problem of love - Eros and the problem of power
- the authorities being heavy cargo of stone at heart. Freud himself, in what he admitted
I never read Nietzsche. Now I saw Freud's psychology in
cultural-historical sequence, as some compensation
Nietzschean deification of power. The problem clearly was not
the confrontation of Freud and Adler, and in the confrontation of Freud and Nietzsche. So I
I believe that this is not just a "family quarrel" psicopatologia. My opinion
that Eros and attraction to power is like twins, the sons of one
father derived from one spiritual power, which, as positive and
negative electric charges manifests itself in an opposite
guises: one, Eros, as a patiens, the other, lust for power, as
agens, and Vice versa. Eros also needs power, as power is Eros, one
passion entails another. Man is at the mercy of his passions,
but however he tries to collect himself. Freud sees the person as
toy run her own passions and desires, the same Adler
shows how man uses his passion for to subdue
other. Helplessness before inexorable fate compelled Nietzsche to invent
for himself "Superman", Freud, as I understand it, so submitted himself
Eros was aere perrenius (stronger than bronze. - lat.), made from
his dogma like a religious Numen. It's no secret that "Zarathustra" gives
himself for the gospel, and Freud in his own way tried to surpass the Church and
to canonize his teachings. Of course, he tried to avoid publicity, but
suspect my intention to become his prophet. His attempt was
tragic, and he himself was devalued. This always happens with the Numen, and that
true, for that which in one case seems correct, in another
turns out to be false, what we think as his defense, is fraught with together with
the and threat. Nominatie experience and elevates and humiliated at the same time. If
Freud once occurred to me to imagine that sexuality carries
numinosum itself that it is God and devil in one person, from the point of view
psychology is no doubt, he could not be confined to a narrow
a framework of biological concepts. And Nietzsche, maybe not soar in their
speculation and did not lose ground under the feet, hold on to it more firmly
the basic conditions of human existence.
 Nominatie every experience is fraught with a threat to the human psyche, he
as if catching her so that at any moment this  the thin filament can
break off, and people will lose the saving balance. For some, this experience
means an unconditional "Yes" for others - the unconditional "No." From the East
it is the concept of Nirvana (nirdvandva - absence of duality). I never
do not forget about it. But the pendulum of our consciousness makes its variations
between sense and nonsense, not between justice and
injustice. The danger nominatie States lies in the temptation
extreme, that a little truth take the truth and small
the error is regarded as fatal. Tout passe (the past. - FR.), what was
true yesterday, today may seem confusing, but what was considered
incorrect the day before yesterday, will be a revelation tomorrow. This is one of
those psychological laws, which in fact "we
very little is known. We are still far from understanding what somethingis not
there are up to until some infinitesimal and, alas, so
brief and transient consciousness will not mark it as something.
 Talking with the Freud that I learned about his fear: he was afraid nominatie
the "shining" of his theory can be darkened if it will be full of a kind of "stream
black mud". Thus, an entirely mythological situation:
the struggle between light and darkness. This explains nominatie complexes of Freud and the
why in the moment of danger, he turned to purely religious remedies
- to the dogma. In my book "Metamorphoses and symbols of libido" (1912), in which
read about the psychology of asceticism, I tried to explain the reasons for his
strange behavior, mythological context. Sexual interpretation on the one
hand, and powerful claims of the dogmatists on the other, gave me
the problem of typology. The subject of my scientific interest is Arctic steel
characteristics of the psyche, as well as the study of "flow of black mud -
of occultism", which I dedicated several decades. I tried to understand
conscious and unconscious historical background of this from the point of view
of modern psychology.
 No less a curiosity caused me to Freud's views
extrasensory perception and parapsychology in General. In 1909, during
our meeting in Vienna, I asked his opinion about these phenomena. On
because of his materialistic prejudice, he declared that all my
questions are pointless and shown as superficial positivism that
I had great difficulty not  to answer sharpness. It happened
a few years before Freud himself recognized the seriousness of parapsychology and
the actual reliability of "occult" phenomena.
 But at that moment, when I listened to his arguments, I had
strange feeling, as if my diaphragm had suddenly grown iron and
red-hot, it seemed to me, even began to glow. And in
this moment from near the bookcase there was a terrible roar. We
both in a fright jumped - it seemed that the Cabinet would capsize us. I,
recollecting himself, he said to Freud: "Here's to you  an example of a so-called catalytic
exteriorization". "Leave, - he got angry - it's perfect nonsense".
"No, Professor,' I cried, ' you're wrong! And I'll prove it to you: now
you will hear the exact same roar!" And indeed, as soon as I said
these words, out of the closet again there was a roar.
 Still don't understand, where did my confidence. But I was
I am convinced that this will happen. Freud shocked and looked at me. Don't know
what he thought and what he saw. I know one thing - this incident provoked him
suspicion, and I had the feeling that I hurt him. We
never discussed it with him.