Dreams: a Comparative Contrast Between Two Theories of the Possible Functions and Meanings of Dreams
Abstract Both Freud and Jung provided important and interesting theories on dreams; encompassing their functions, their roots, and their meanings. Freud looked at dreams as a result of repressed memories, particularly repressed sexual memories from our childhood. Jung however, believed that dreams delved beyond sexual repression during younger years, to other problems, be it trauma, anxiety etc. Jung also believed dreams changed predominately through middle adult years, while Freud believed the opposite. There is little empirical evidence to reinforce either Freud or Jung’s theories, however, their contributions to the study of dreams in psychology cannot be lessened or denied.
Dreams: A comparative contrast between two theories of the possible
Functions and meanings of dreams
Who among us hasn’t woken up in the middle of the night drenched in sweat following a nightmare, or indeed woke up and wished the dream they had just had was in fact real! Dreams have always been important to people as they have been considered different and paranormal. Some have interpreted dreams as messages from God, that they foretold the future, and that they required decoding in order to be understood. Some believe that a dream not interpreted is like a letter not read. (Hall & Castle, 1966). Dreams are considered to be expressions of the deepest levels and most remote recesses of the human mind (Hall & Castle, 1966) and that they are a record of the past or possibly a portent of the future (Hall & Castle, 1966). They can be both foreboding and welcoming, and are often not a reflection of the waking conscious person we consider ourselves to be. Dream interpretation is the core of this essay, as it has social, medicinal, prophetic, and religious importance with implications for self-knowledge. (Blum, 2000) Dreams were not always thought of in this vein. In early times dreams were idealised and devalued as nonsensical. Aristotle (350 BCE) was among
Dreams: A comparative contrast between two theories of the possible
Functions and meanings of dreams
Who among us hasn’t woken up in the middle of the night drenched in sweat following a nightmare, or indeed woke up and wished the dream they had just had was in fact real! Dreams have always been important to people as they have been considered different and paranormal. Some have interpreted dreams as messages from God, that they foretold the future, and that they required decoding in order to be understood. Some believe that a dream not interpreted is like a letter not read. (Hall & Castle, 1966). Dreams are considered to be expressions of the deepest levels and most remote recesses of the human mind (Hall & Castle, 1966) and that they are a record of the past or possibly a portent of the future (Hall & Castle, 1966). They can be both foreboding and welcoming, and are often not a reflection of the waking conscious person we consider ourselves to be. Dream interpretation is the core of this essay, as it has social, medicinal, prophetic, and religious importance with implications for self-knowledge. (Blum, 2000) Dreams were not always thought of in this vein. In early times dreams were idealised and devalued as nonsensical. Aristotle (350 BCE) was among
Bibliography: BOOKS: - Domhoff, William G, (2003), The Scientific Study Of Dreams, Washington DC - Foulkes, David, (1978), A Grammar Of Dreams, New York, Harvester Press. - Freud, Sigmund, (1900), The Interpretation Of Dreams, Great Britain, Unwin Brothers Ltd. - Hall, Calvin S & Van De Castle, Robert L, (1966). Content Analysis of Dreams, USA, Meredith Publishing Company JOURNAL ARTICLES: - Blum, Harold, (2000), The Writing And Interpretation Of Dreams, - Lippmann, Paul, (2000), Dreams and Psychoanalysis: A Love–Hate Story, Psychoanalytic Psychology, 17(4), 627-650.