If you don’t like to read, you haven’t found the right book


Neofreydizma – a term that combines the various schools of Freudianism, arising since the 1940s. (Primarily in the US). The common feature of these schools was the departure from Freud and the hegemony of the individual in his theory in the direction of recognition of the priority of social relations. Hence the desire to enrich the achievements of sociology Freudianism, which translates into “sociologization” psychology “psychologization” sociology. The starting point for neo-Freudianism can be regarded as the dissemination of ideas separated from Freud, Alfred Adler (inferiority complex, “will to power”, “social interest”) and CG Jung (collective unconscious), which sometimes is referred to the neo-Freudianism. The largest representative’s neo Freyd – Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, K. G. Sullivan, tend to it as Margaret Mead, E. Erickson et al.

Horney stressed the importance for the formation of anxiety neurosis that occurs in childhood when faced with a hostile outside world and lack of love of parents and entourage, resulting in internal conflicts and the struggle for self-realization (Horney, 1995, 2008, 2009, 2014). Erich Fromm also saw the origins of neurosis at odds with the world around them that creates a sense of loneliness and automatic conformism (Fromm 1966, 1986). G. Sullivan rejected the priority of Freudian libido, the main component of the system of the person admitted dynamisms (special “energy patterns”), which appear in the communications, ensuring the satisfaction of individual needs (Hall, Lindsay, 1997). American neo-Freudians E. Byrne attached special importance to the game as a form of interpersonal communication in the structure of the “I” singled out “child” state “parent” and “adult”, entering into the transaction with the respective state of the other person, created scenic personality theory, according to which the fate of identity is determined by its role in the life scenarios, interpersonal relationships (Bern, 1996). Thus Neo-Freudians go beyond the boundaries of Freudian psychoanalysis, making a contribution to sociological research (primarily in the sociology of small groups), giving them a psychological basis.

Apart stands the figure of the French “post Freyd” J. Lacan, who proclaimed “return to Freud”, although his theory of the “mirror stage” as a Function “I” (Lacan, 1999; Lacan, 2015) and the idea of structuring the unconscious on the model of the language also increase social significance of psychoanalysis.

His version was proposed and neo Freyd Freudo-Marxism.

In American literature on youth trail neo Freyd particularly noticeable. In the Russian literature, it took place in the 1920s. When Freyd and Marksizm trend in youth research has been very active (AB Zalkind et al.). In recent decades, the application of Neo-Freudian conceptual scheme for the study of Russian youth is rare. Jobs TN Bukhtiyarova, who studied in the aspect of sociology behavior of the Russian youth relying on theoretical and methodological arsenal of Karen Horney (Bukhtiyarova, 2006) – One of the few exceptions.