Found the book here:

http://www.netmug.org/~oscar/pdf/(ebook)Freud,Sigmund-TheInterpretationofDreams.pdf


Thought someone might find use for it in this day and age.

-------
In the following pages, I shall demonstrate that there is a psychological technique which makes it possible to interpret dreams, and that on the application of this technique, every dream will reveal itself as a psychological structure, full of significance, and one which may be assigned to a specific place in the psychic activities of the waking state. Further, I shall endeavour to elucidate the processes which underlie the strangeness and obscurity
of dreams, and to deduce from these processes the nature of the psychic forces whose conflict or co-operation is responsible for our dreams. This done, my investigation will terminate, as it will have reached the point where the problem of the dream merges into more comprehensive problems, and to solve these, we must have recourse to material of a different kind.
----------


Download if you please as it might not be there long.

Thought someone might find use for it in this day and age.

Thanks, but it only has use in print format.

E-texts make poor toilet paper.

Perhaps someone will correct me, but last I checked, making untested and unsupported blanket statements while obsessing over your dick was not considered part of the scientific method.

Then I thought, "well in a postmodern world, maybe the definition of the scientific method could be extended to include what Freud did!"
So I looked.
http://skepdic.com/science.html

Hmm. Appears not.

Xev - "my clitoris has a second name" - B

It has always seemed to me that Freud underestimated humans. A very bad mistake on his part. I'm surprised he never came across anything that proved him wrong in his own eyes.

-------
In the following pages, I shall demonstrate that there is a psychological technique which makes it possible to interpret dreams, and that on the application of this technique, every dream will reveal itself as a psychological structure, full of significance, and one which may be assigned to a specific place in the psychic activities of the waking state. Further, I shall endeavour to elucidate the processes which underlie the strangeness and obscurity
of dreams, and to deduce from these processes the nature of the psychic forces whose conflict or co-operation is responsible for our dreams. This done, my investigation will terminate, as it will have reached the point where the problem of the dream merges into more comprehensive problems, and to solve these, we must have recourse to material of a different kind.
----------


I think that Freud left out one immensely important aspect of dreams: they are also beautiful.
We love our dreams because of their beauty, and this is another reason why they are so important to us.

It has always seemed to me that Freud underestimated humans. A very bad mistake on his part. I'm surprised he never came across anything that proved him wrong in his own eyes.

Huh, he was repeatedly treated for cancer due to smoking. Already this makes me doubt his reasonability at least a bit.

Smoking was a fashion statement of the time. It was a fashion statement for many decades. I wouldn't consider that part of his persona out of the norm.

It's more of his fixation on sexuality, the thing for which he is so famous, which I dislike. Darn, it has changed cultures into what we know today, the "show off your sex life on tv" thing. However, he did make a lot of points that were revolutionary at the time. I appreciate the way Freud made people pay attention to childhood in stead of thinking that child years are just this stage over which the person needs to get over. I also like his free association method. But rooting so much of human behavior in sex is such a large underestimation! I'm a fan of Jung. He refined Freud's ideas into what looks more like truth.

What I mean by "Huh, he was repeatedly treated for cancer due to smoking. Already this makes me doubt his reasonability at least a bit." is that this person kept on doing what was harmful to him. He knew it was harmful, yet he went on. As if this was one of his fixations -- and he didn't have the will power to overcome it.

So to me, he comes across just as persuasive as a fat doctor telling me how important it is to be thin -- not persuasive at all.

RosaMagika:

Maybe they didn't know the link between cancer and smoking back then.

whitewolf:
What is there in life but sex, power and death? Humans are simple organisms.

Yes, Freud is overly focused on sex. He was apparently rather screwed up in that regard, and we must remember that Freudian psychoanalysis is basically Freud's struggling to understand himself.
But he fails, not simply in focusing on sex, but in getting it wrong.

Sartre's sometime girlfriend wrote a nice article on him:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/debeauv2.htm

From The Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud (1900)
http://psychology.about.com/library/classics/blfreud_dream5a2i.htm


Here a simple dream about a woman not being able to buy anything for dinner is turned into sexual fantasies.

Note how an unknown vegetable becomes asparagus and black radish.