You know I've spent a lot of time studying Freud, and yes I have to admit that he is on his own bullshit A LOT, but you can't deny many of the things he argues

You know I've spent a lot of time studying Freud, and yes I have to admit that he is on his own bullshit A LOT, but you can't deny many of the things he argues without seeming ridiculous yourself. Our parents are the beginnings of our social world, and structure our relations even down to the most intimate. Human culture supersedes human nature to the point where sexual fetishism completely overrides "natural" sexuality. And related to the last two points, our social mode of being is deeply interrelated with our sexuality, and ones emotional problems are always part and parcel of the very language they use to describe them. It's not just "mommy milkers," Freud describes in his writings the entire structural order of being and the interrelation between our actual experience of reality and our mode of describing it as being deeply intertwined. How can someone trump such a claim with regular "empirical" findings, such a notion of empiricism from some pure, privileged stand point is already infected with a set of presuppositions which make it impossible to question the very social norms which structure their perspective. Freud is still so popular, so well-read, because for all his kookiness, his coke-addiction, his authoritarianism and his cult of personality, he still made pathbreaking discoveries about the structure of the human psych. You can shit talk him all you want, but people really do want to fuck their therapists, and it was only Freud who was first able to formally theorize why. Freud did also directly credit Schopenhauer as his philosophical antecedent, so there's not even any controversy there. Just like Plato, he made up his own myths, doesn't mean they weren't practical. The trouble is not his mythology, its everyone else's, and everyone who fails to recognize the mythological origins of their own empiricism and notions about the world.