RG-11.08, Interview with Dr. Lawrence Friedman, May 1, 1963 | NCP-LA
RG-11.08, Interview with Dr. Lawrence Friedman, May 1, 1963 (PDF Document, 1.21 MB)
Download Original File
Request hi-res copy
Title:
RG-11.08, Interview with Dr. Lawrence Friedman, May 1, 1963
Date:
May 1, 1963
ID:
RG-11.08
Repository:
NCP-LA
Found in:
Interviews with the Members of Psychoanalytic Study Group of Los Angeles , 1961 - 1965
Item 8: RG-11.08, Interview with Dr. Lawrence Friedman, May 1, 1963, May 1,1963
Item 8: RG-11.08, Interview with Dr. Lawrence Friedman, May 1, 1963, May 1,1963Creators:
Dr. Albert Kandelin, Chairman of the History Committee (1961 - 1965)
Dr. Lawrence Friedman, psychoanalyst (1926 -- 1960s)
Dr. Lawrence Friedman, psychoanalyst (1926 -- 1960s)
Subjects:
Academic writings lost freedom of expression under May Romm guidance, Psychoanalytic Institute 1950s
Analyzing History of Psychoanalytic institutions in Los Angeles, the History Committee, 1960s
Bureaucratic trend in the functioning of the Psychoanalytic Institute after the Split, Dr. Friedman
Controlling role of the Education Committee, Dr. Friedman
Control over the writings of candidates by the Education Committee, left no scholarly freedom
Criticism on the state of affairs in the Institute in post-Simmel time, Dr. Friedman
Discourse of the contemporaneous psychoanalytic institutions
Discourse of the ideological or personal nature of the Split, Dr. Friedman, 1963
Discourse of the Split of Psychoanalytic Institute of Los Angeles by Dr. Lawrence Friedman
Dr. Lawrence Friedman, military service in the time of the Second World War
Dr. Lawrence Friedman began studies in psychiatry in Vienna in 1930s
Free psychoanalysis was regarded as imposition by many people, Dr. Friedman
History of the Psychoanalytic Institute of Los Angeles after the Split, under May Romm guidance
Incessant organization of superficial committees for the sake of having committees, Dr. Friedman
Interview with Dr. Lawrence Friedman, conducted by Dr. Kandelin, May 1, 1963
Nowadays, patients are financially restraint to afford psychoanalysis, Dr. Friedman
Over-organization of psychoanalytic institutes, a common characteristic, Dr. Friedman
People who were inducing the controversy are still active in the profession, Dr. Lawrence Friedman
Reevaluation of the conceptual premises of the Institute after the Split, Dr. Friedman
Reference to distinguished service of Dr. Ernst Lewy in the times of Split and afterwards
Reflections on the prominent role of Dr. Simmel in the formation and running the Society
Reservation in telling the facts in the course of interviews, interviewees, Dr. Friedman
Rules and regulations became integral to the Psychoanalytic Institute after the Split, Dr. Friedman
Scientific biography of Dr. Lawrence Friedman
Separation of the Institute and the Society is a waste, Dr. Lawrence Friedman, 1963
The Cause of the History Committee and its Project, to understand and improve, Dr. Kandelin
The emphasis should be scientific and on training with minimum administration, Dr. Lawrence Friedman
The nature of the new Institute is control and approvement, lack of academic freedom, Dr. Friedman
There is an active seduction on the part of the Institute for Medical Psychoanalysis, Dr. Friedman
There is no interest in analysis but interest in themselves, the Theory is not a consideration
The work of the new Institute seems efficient only on paper, Dr. Lawrence Friedman
To eliminate division between the Society and the Institute, for the sake of science, Dr. Friedman
Two opposite narratives pursued by the both institutes, Dr. Friedman, 1963
Analyzing History of Psychoanalytic institutions in Los Angeles, the History Committee, 1960s
Bureaucratic trend in the functioning of the Psychoanalytic Institute after the Split, Dr. Friedman
Controlling role of the Education Committee, Dr. Friedman
Control over the writings of candidates by the Education Committee, left no scholarly freedom
Criticism on the state of affairs in the Institute in post-Simmel time, Dr. Friedman
Discourse of the contemporaneous psychoanalytic institutions
Discourse of the ideological or personal nature of the Split, Dr. Friedman, 1963
Discourse of the Split of Psychoanalytic Institute of Los Angeles by Dr. Lawrence Friedman
Dr. Lawrence Friedman, military service in the time of the Second World War
Dr. Lawrence Friedman began studies in psychiatry in Vienna in 1930s
Free psychoanalysis was regarded as imposition by many people, Dr. Friedman
History of the Psychoanalytic Institute of Los Angeles after the Split, under May Romm guidance
Incessant organization of superficial committees for the sake of having committees, Dr. Friedman
Interview with Dr. Lawrence Friedman, conducted by Dr. Kandelin, May 1, 1963
Nowadays, patients are financially restraint to afford psychoanalysis, Dr. Friedman
Over-organization of psychoanalytic institutes, a common characteristic, Dr. Friedman
People who were inducing the controversy are still active in the profession, Dr. Lawrence Friedman
Reevaluation of the conceptual premises of the Institute after the Split, Dr. Friedman
Reference to distinguished service of Dr. Ernst Lewy in the times of Split and afterwards
Reflections on the prominent role of Dr. Simmel in the formation and running the Society
Reservation in telling the facts in the course of interviews, interviewees, Dr. Friedman
Rules and regulations became integral to the Psychoanalytic Institute after the Split, Dr. Friedman
Scientific biography of Dr. Lawrence Friedman
Separation of the Institute and the Society is a waste, Dr. Lawrence Friedman, 1963
The Cause of the History Committee and its Project, to understand and improve, Dr. Kandelin
The emphasis should be scientific and on training with minimum administration, Dr. Lawrence Friedman
The nature of the new Institute is control and approvement, lack of academic freedom, Dr. Friedman
There is an active seduction on the part of the Institute for Medical Psychoanalysis, Dr. Friedman
There is no interest in analysis but interest in themselves, the Theory is not a consideration
The work of the new Institute seems efficient only on paper, Dr. Lawrence Friedman
To eliminate division between the Society and the Institute, for the sake of science, Dr. Friedman
Two opposite narratives pursued by the both institutes, Dr. Friedman, 1963
Languages: