What do you think?
Rate this book
The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis
The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis is a comprehensive book written by the renowned Austrian neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud. The book chronicles the origins of psychoanalysis, its development, and the various theories and concepts that have shaped this field of study. Freud explores the evolution of psychoanalysis from its early beginnings in his own clinical practice, to its growth and expansion as a field of study with the contributions of other prominent psychoanalysts. He delves into the key concepts of psychoanalysis, such as the unconscious mind, the Oedipus complex, and the role of sexuality in human behavior. The book also delves into the various controversies and criticisms that psychoanalysis has faced over the years, including criticisms of its scientific validity and its effectiveness as a treatment for mental illness. Overall, The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis is a seminal work that provides a comprehensive overview of the history and evolution of psychoanalysis, as well as its impact on the field of psychology and mental health. It is a must-read for anyone interested in the history and development of psychoanalysis, as well as those interested in the study of human behavior and mental health.Collection of six of Freud's lectures in the states.This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the old original and may contain some imperfections such as library marks and notations. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions, that are true to their original work.
48 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 1910
7 people are currently reading
156 people want to read
About the author
Sigmund Freud
4,367 books8,498 followersDr. Sigismund Freud (later changed to Sigmund) was a neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, who created an entirely new approach to the understanding of the human personality. He is regarded as one of the most influential—and controversial—minds of the 20th century.
In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.
Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.
In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.
After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.
In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.
Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.
In 1873, Freud began to study medicine at the University of Vienna. After graduating, he worked at the Vienna General Hospital. He collaborated with Josef Breuer in treating hysteria by the recall of painful experiences under hypnosis. In 1885, Freud went to Paris as a student of the neurologist Jean Charcot. On his return to Vienna the following year, Freud set up in private practice, specialising in nervous and brain disorders. The same year he married Martha Bernays, with whom he had six children.
Freud developed the theory that humans have an unconscious in which sexual and aggressive impulses are in perpetual conflict for supremacy with the defences against them. In 1897, he began an intensive analysis of himself. In 1900, his major work 'The Interpretation of Dreams' was published in which Freud analysed dreams in terms of unconscious desires and experiences.
In 1902, Freud was appointed Professor of Neuropathology at the University of Vienna, a post he held until 1938. Although the medical establishment disagreed with many of his theories, a group of pupils and followers began to gather around Freud. In 1910, the International Psychoanalytic Association was founded with Carl Jung, a close associate of Freud's, as the president. Jung later broke with Freud and developed his own theories.
After World War One, Freud spent less time in clinical observation and concentrated on the application of his theories to history, art, literature and anthropology. In 1923, he published 'The Ego and the Id', which suggested a new structural model of the mind, divided into the 'id, the 'ego' and the 'superego'.
In 1933, the Nazis publicly burnt a number of Freud's books. In 1938, shortly after the Nazis annexed Austria, Freud left Vienna for London with his wife and daughter Anna.
Freud had been diagnosed with cancer of the jaw in 1923, and underwent more than 30 operations. He died of cancer on 23 September 1939.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
May 14, 2023
What a funny man I wonder if he wants to have sex with his mother
July 7, 2024
The book captures the pioneering phase of psychoanalysis, so is essential for anyone interested in the fields of psychology, psychiatry, and psychotherapy, as well as for those curious about the history of ideas and their impact on culture and society. You can gain a foundational understanding of how unconscious processes influence behavior and thought and learn about techniques like free association and dream analysis.
December 28, 2024
As much as I understand that terminology was limited during this time and that translations may even more improperly convey the message, the second he started talking about infantile sexuality as an inherent characteristic and thumb-sucking as a sexual behaviour he kind of lost me. I know he doesn’t mean sexual in the narrow meaning that we accord it day to day, but it’s difficult to understand his point even in the more abstract form of it.
Super interesting nonetheless, the vivid and relatable scenarios he offers to back up or exemplify his experiences in the study were fantastic. So funny they described therapy as we know it today as “talking therapy” and “chimney sweeping” and so strange that although so strongly supported by experiment that people still refuse to acknowledge the benefits of it.
3.5 but I’m a chronic down-grader. Sorry freud.
Super interesting nonetheless, the vivid and relatable scenarios he offers to back up or exemplify his experiences in the study were fantastic. So funny they described therapy as we know it today as “talking therapy” and “chimney sweeping” and so strange that although so strongly supported by experiment that people still refuse to acknowledge the benefits of it.
3.5 but I’m a chronic down-grader. Sorry freud.
March 14, 2013
Lots of things that I didn't understand when I was in college become clear to me now, about what Freud was actually trying to say. Back then, in his time, due to the lack of proper words, expression and examples, it was so hard to transmit his theoretical principles to people who do not share the experience, knowledge or the ability to abstract higher order logic from limited experience. Sex. that's the word he used. but you can feel his pain through his argument. he would be so happy that an alternative had already exist, which he can use directly without causing the misconception of his audience.
April 5, 2014
This was helpful in understanding the method used in the treatment of combat veterans suffering from PTSD. And while I don't accept everything Freud asserts, I believe the method described can be helpful. Not that long, not that heavy; give it a try. I think that you too, will probably like it.
December 13, 2025
3.5. It's very interesting to learn about the origins of psychoanalysis, how the whole of the project began essentially on a whim by Breuer and was brought to life by Freud and his contemporaries. These lectures are mostly spared of Freud's uncomfortable sexual speculations, though as a consequence we don't see a very detailed picture of Freudian desire in this work. I thought it was educational and kind of comical at times, imagining Freud presenting this to an American audience in a tone very different from his other works.
May 9, 2025
i know he’s a big figure in psychology so learning his theories is very interesting, but it did weird me out.
August 26, 2020
I would recommend reading this book if you want a one-stop Freud. It's mercifully short, probably shorter than any other book by Freud, and it covers all the major themes: repression, Oedipus complex, sublimation, dreams, and neurosis. Still, it's mostly garbage stuff, but weirdly compelling garbage.
I don't have time to make anything like a thorough critique, but I'll just note that his observations about children's sexuality aren't completely off the rails (I have observed sexual behavior in children myself), but then his description of children falsely concluding ideas about how babies are born seemed totally rationalistic, which is a terrible way to analyze people. Sure, kids get stuff wrong all the time, but the idea that they work things out so neatly left me scratching my head and so left me thinking that Freud's an interesting conversation partner, but probably more harm than good.
Anyway, the only thing I didn't quite see here was a defense of his materialism, the point on which he differed from Jung. Also, is it just me, or had 19th-century medicine developed in unhelpfully comprehensive ways? The fact that one is called a "patient" and health and recovery are assumed to be almost automatic seems to have already appeared.
I don't have time to make anything like a thorough critique, but I'll just note that his observations about children's sexuality aren't completely off the rails (I have observed sexual behavior in children myself), but then his description of children falsely concluding ideas about how babies are born seemed totally rationalistic, which is a terrible way to analyze people. Sure, kids get stuff wrong all the time, but the idea that they work things out so neatly left me scratching my head and so left me thinking that Freud's an interesting conversation partner, but probably more harm than good.
Anyway, the only thing I didn't quite see here was a defense of his materialism, the point on which he differed from Jung. Also, is it just me, or had 19th-century medicine developed in unhelpfully comprehensive ways? The fact that one is called a "patient" and health and recovery are assumed to be almost automatic seems to have already appeared.
August 30, 2025
I've long been deeply suspicious of Freud, essentially because, as Paul Veyne pointed out, he's a mythmaker. What's worse is that he believes his own myths, treating these evident inventions as absolute truth. Here, Freud largely drops the guise of the religious cult leader and instead makes more modest and general claims that feel mostly compelling. Because he starts before his involvement with Psychoanalysis, we get to see that not only did he not invent it, but he actually did improve it considerably. At one point, he makes the now-absurd-but-then-bold challenge to hypnosis being the prevailing method for investigating the psyche; instead, he decided to work with patients in a normal state of consciousness. Contrary to the then-prevailing scientific consensus, he found out that people could actually work through traumatic memories by talk therapy in their normal mind, rather than needing to be "tricked" out of them while in a hypnotized state.
This lent much needed credibility to the burgeoning science of psychology, but he soon tipped it over in the opposite direction. Much of his most infamous theories deal with his (obviously pathological) hyper-fixation upon sexuality as etiology. However, even my complaints about his fixations necessarily use Freudian terms (fixation, for example), paradoxically proving him partially right as I argue for him being largely wrong.
The nice thing about this series of lectures was that he was presenting his ideas for the first time in America, so both geographically and chronologically he was out of his element. Seeing him on his back foot, covering basics instead of wandering out into the unknowable dark, was refreshing. Nietzsche strikes out with force because he speaks for the Shadow-truth, but Freud strikes out with force because he thinks everything he says is right. The two are interrelated, but Nietzsche speaks to uncomfortable truths that every thinking person must admit or explain away; Freud, on the other hand, comes up with weird new ideas, takes for granted the most tenuous of links, and generally turns in only unrevised first drafts of any ideas. Both are guided by intuition, but the former by a poetic (thus, a balancing of Apollonian and the Dionysian), and the latter a purely Dionysian disposition.
Freud must be commended for his boldness and pure inventiveness; he should be condemned for his rashness and lack of scientific rigor. The ingenuity of his ideas is on clear display here in these short lectures. Sometimes his groping in the dark happened upon some really interesting applications, such as the efficacious nature of talk therapy. However, the main problem comes when he assumes his theories have universal validity, both across peoples and across times. He assumes that civilization has always been a repressive force in people's lives, when it's evident from certain ancient civilizations that it's merely an organizational force. In other words, the contemporary psychological tendency toward putting everything on a spectrum is a wise one. Sexuality certainly is an important factor to development in some people, but not in all. In others, they have other primary vices/passions which drive things, which everything else submits to.
His stern refusal to back down from his theories of infantile sexuality reek especially badly today, especially among the more conservative natures. His dismissal of any contrary evidence to his theories (such as the vast majority of dreams being non-wish-fulfilling) is probably the most destructive of his legacies. Because of his refusal to approach scientific subjects scientifically (instead like a political partisan with a starting conclusion in mind), he blatantly invented fantastic explanations for that contradictory evidence. This anti-logical tendency festers in the humanities today, and it's what conservative intellectuals wrongfully assume is at the root of all leftist theory. Such is obviously a strawman, but it is wise to be wary of any theorist who comes across data and suddenly invents new terms to deal with problems in his theory, rather than revising the theory itself.
The central anxiety that Freud points to is an important one, despite his wobbly grasp of it: there arises out of the child, with its peculiar gifts and tendencies, the so-called normal man, the bearer and partly the victim of our painfully acquired civilization. He and Nietzsche both rightfully point out how strange and unnatural human civilization is. This is a good thing, because it not only makes us distinct from the animals, but because such distinction allows us to rise above them, both morally (not raping and murdering) and practically (standing upright, building technology, etc.). The knee-jerk complaints conservatives have about Freud's notions of child sexuality and repression may initially be moralistic prudishness, but that doesn't mean the complaints are wrong. As Roger Scruton once said, being a conservative intellectual is basically taking the long way around back to your original common sense. True, Freud could be right about childhood sexuality; however, the observational evidence doesn't support it. True, repression might be a cause of psychic pain, but what is the cost we're willing to pay for civilization? We all must pay a social cost to live peaceably with others, and no person with sense would suggest we truly "return to monke." The real question isn't "how do we cure repression," but rather "how much repression is worth it?" Repression, like exclusion, is a neutral thing, no matter what certain post-structuralist philosophers and psychologists would like to assert...
This lent much needed credibility to the burgeoning science of psychology, but he soon tipped it over in the opposite direction. Much of his most infamous theories deal with his (obviously pathological) hyper-fixation upon sexuality as etiology. However, even my complaints about his fixations necessarily use Freudian terms (fixation, for example), paradoxically proving him partially right as I argue for him being largely wrong.
The nice thing about this series of lectures was that he was presenting his ideas for the first time in America, so both geographically and chronologically he was out of his element. Seeing him on his back foot, covering basics instead of wandering out into the unknowable dark, was refreshing. Nietzsche strikes out with force because he speaks for the Shadow-truth, but Freud strikes out with force because he thinks everything he says is right. The two are interrelated, but Nietzsche speaks to uncomfortable truths that every thinking person must admit or explain away; Freud, on the other hand, comes up with weird new ideas, takes for granted the most tenuous of links, and generally turns in only unrevised first drafts of any ideas. Both are guided by intuition, but the former by a poetic (thus, a balancing of Apollonian and the Dionysian), and the latter a purely Dionysian disposition.
Freud must be commended for his boldness and pure inventiveness; he should be condemned for his rashness and lack of scientific rigor. The ingenuity of his ideas is on clear display here in these short lectures. Sometimes his groping in the dark happened upon some really interesting applications, such as the efficacious nature of talk therapy. However, the main problem comes when he assumes his theories have universal validity, both across peoples and across times. He assumes that civilization has always been a repressive force in people's lives, when it's evident from certain ancient civilizations that it's merely an organizational force. In other words, the contemporary psychological tendency toward putting everything on a spectrum is a wise one. Sexuality certainly is an important factor to development in some people, but not in all. In others, they have other primary vices/passions which drive things, which everything else submits to.
His stern refusal to back down from his theories of infantile sexuality reek especially badly today, especially among the more conservative natures. His dismissal of any contrary evidence to his theories (such as the vast majority of dreams being non-wish-fulfilling) is probably the most destructive of his legacies. Because of his refusal to approach scientific subjects scientifically (instead like a political partisan with a starting conclusion in mind), he blatantly invented fantastic explanations for that contradictory evidence. This anti-logical tendency festers in the humanities today, and it's what conservative intellectuals wrongfully assume is at the root of all leftist theory. Such is obviously a strawman, but it is wise to be wary of any theorist who comes across data and suddenly invents new terms to deal with problems in his theory, rather than revising the theory itself.
The central anxiety that Freud points to is an important one, despite his wobbly grasp of it: there arises out of the child, with its peculiar gifts and tendencies, the so-called normal man, the bearer and partly the victim of our painfully acquired civilization. He and Nietzsche both rightfully point out how strange and unnatural human civilization is. This is a good thing, because it not only makes us distinct from the animals, but because such distinction allows us to rise above them, both morally (not raping and murdering) and practically (standing upright, building technology, etc.). The knee-jerk complaints conservatives have about Freud's notions of child sexuality and repression may initially be moralistic prudishness, but that doesn't mean the complaints are wrong. As Roger Scruton once said, being a conservative intellectual is basically taking the long way around back to your original common sense. True, Freud could be right about childhood sexuality; however, the observational evidence doesn't support it. True, repression might be a cause of psychic pain, but what is the cost we're willing to pay for civilization? We all must pay a social cost to live peaceably with others, and no person with sense would suggest we truly "return to monke." The real question isn't "how do we cure repression," but rather "how much repression is worth it?" Repression, like exclusion, is a neutral thing, no matter what certain post-structuralist philosophers and psychologists would like to assert...
December 5, 2017
A good overview of what Freud was working on when he gave these lectures in the US. Much of what he came up with is still valid a hundred years later, though some not so.
February 18, 2025
Title: The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis
Author: Sigmund Freud
Length: 1h 41min
Published: 1910
Format: Audiobook
Read and review: 2025
The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis is a collection of lectures delivered by Sigmund Freud in 1910, outlining some of the foundations of psychoanalysis as understood by Freud.
The book introduces themes such as the unconcious mind, dream analysis, hysteria, the role of sexuality, free accosiation, childhood, neurosis, resistance, transference and the therapeutic process.
Very short book. Doesn't go very deep as you can quess by the length and variety of subjects. Good for introducing the reader to the history of psychoanalysis and what was thought back then, otherwise not the best.
Author: Sigmund Freud
Length: 1h 41min
Published: 1910
Format: Audiobook
Read and review: 2025
The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis is a collection of lectures delivered by Sigmund Freud in 1910, outlining some of the foundations of psychoanalysis as understood by Freud.
The book introduces themes such as the unconcious mind, dream analysis, hysteria, the role of sexuality, free accosiation, childhood, neurosis, resistance, transference and the therapeutic process.
Very short book. Doesn't go very deep as you can quess by the length and variety of subjects. Good for introducing the reader to the history of psychoanalysis and what was thought back then, otherwise not the best.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 9, 2021
These transcribed lectures were remarkably more accessible than I had expected. Whatever Freud's overall legacy may be now, I personally do find certain points he makes on childhood sexuality and its natural repression through moral and social conditioning very interesting and not necessarily to be scoffed at. He also makes some very interesting - and, I'm sure, quite controversial - statements regarding homosexuality ... opining, if I may simplify it, that attraction towards the same sex results from a stunted sexual development, entailing an inability to sufficiently overcome one's "auto-erotic" capacities of self-pleasure discovered in childhood.
July 23, 2024
"The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis" by Sigmund Freud is a groundbreaking book that explores the evolution of psychoanalytic theory. Freud presents his revolutionary ideas in an accessible manner, discussing key concepts like the unconscious mind and the interpretation of dreams. The book also provides real-life case studies and highlights the contributions of other influential figures in the field. It is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the complexities of the human mind and the origins of psychoanalysis.
June 14, 2024
Extremely good for historical purposes... Good intro to the conscious, unconscious, repression, and transference as they are deployed... Does what it says on the box. I don't like what it does on the box though
August 15, 2025
Very interesting snapshot of a young Freud making a case for psychoanalysis. Nice to see him a bit on the defensive here, trying to address early skeptics of his movement. Hits all the beats you'd expect rather succinctly.
February 25, 2019
A very informative collection of lectures which most succinctly explain Freud's psychoanalytic theory and diagnostic method-in his own words.
January 1, 2020
Interesting if false, psychoanalysis is no science.
June 24, 2020
A compilation of lectures that Freud gave on the topic of his development of Psychoanalysis.
September 8, 2020
Worth reading bunch of 5 lectures containing basic knowledge about the basic ideas of Psychoanalysis.
December 22, 2020
The father of psychoanalysis explains how it came to be and how he feels about those who have adopted it for their own purposes.
March 22, 2021
This dude was so off on so many things.
May 10, 2021
Well communicated but it's important to be weary of its frequent incorrectness.
January 8, 2024
Pretty boring actually
Read
January 11, 2024Sure Jan
Read
January 28, 2024i was forced to read this for my history of psychiatry seminar. my head hurts
Read
June 22, 2024ew ew ew ew ew yuck ew
December 21, 2020
I thought that my definition of sex was extremely broad and all-encompassing, but I am ashamed to say the Freud was truly the kinkmaster.
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews