Young Indiana Jones, Freud, Jung and Adler

From chapter 3: The Perils Of Cupid

[@MrKingpin239]

Freud and Jung are doing all of the talking and Adler is the quiet one. Ironically Freud and Jung are considered Introverts and Adler an Extrovert.

[@00karl001]

Beeing introvert doesn't mean you're not able to discuss with people.

[@MrKingpin239]

Is that what I said being an Introvert means ?

[@00karl001]

Kingpin 666 No, I just wanted to say that in my opinion thats not ironic. I hope you haven't felt attacked by my statement cause thats not what I was looking for ;)

[@CurtHowland]

Maybe the writers just didn't know anything cliched about Adler, so left him mute.

[@jpgrumbach8562]

@@CurtHowland, yes and it works only if we know the cliches.

[@zacharyzier314]

What an amazing scene, these incredibly smart and wise old men jointly deciding to help young Indiana and pass on their wisdom and knowledge on such an intriguing topic as love.

[@ayannaarceo6915]

I WISH I WAS AS LUCKY AS HENRY, BEING ABLE TO CONVERSE WITH THESE GENIUSES AND ASK THEM INSIGHTS

[@JanksterProductions]

This is hilarious because it's exactly how I imagine Freud and Jung acted together.

[@Luis2899]

Great video. I remember this clip being shown in a college lecture class on Psychology.

[@AntonDoesMusic]

The guy playing Jung looks like Adler and the guy playing Adler looks like Jung. Casting Max von Sydow as Freud was a good choice, though.

[@niroshanperera6323]

Exactly. Jung was younger than Freud. A lean, decent looking guy in his 30's and 40's. Micheal Fassbinder played him in A Dangerous Method. Viggo Mortenson played Freud.

[@cesaraugusto8630]

It is a lovely episode. I'm 42 but still remember when our young hero falls in love.

[@debrajdas4527]

For some reason western culture has a lot of attraction for Freud.

[@027220]

3:47 - :53 Yes they 'are,' like Yoda once said, "Truly 'wonderful' the mind of a child is." 4:34 - 6:48 Great words of wisdom.

[@sabbersolo]

Haha Ernst Hugo and Max von Sydow!! Two great Swedish actors.

[@arthurbriand2175]

Indiana Jones met Freud, Jung and Adler in this scene, but the young actor also had a chance to act with Anthony Hopkins and Max Von Sydow, that must have been something.

[@filmfan4]

Love is patient and kind.

[@cesaraugusto8630]

"Why do I feel so out of control?" Life was better by far 30 years ago. No games, no egos,

[@mrhankey212]

what is love? ... baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more!

[@albertwesker1370]

It must be so great to meet them and be taught by them or even just a conversation☺☺☺

[@bastiisalive]

Damn....Freud really had a dominant personality....and still believes that the unconscious and Sex are what our behaviour is based on Jung discussing archetypes - Anima and Animus....daaamn

[@garrisongosling7739]

BABY DON'T HURT ME!!!!!

[@youwillforgetinaweek]

Garrison Gosling Don't hurt me...

[@apologyisnothepolicy]

Dude,this is badass on infinite levels

[@sabbersolo]

Oh AND Bjorn Granath, also from Sweden.

[@iatnbiatnb]

Okay I don't remember Jung having a turtle chin to be honest

[@manzero134gd]

I just lost it whn Freud just replied "Sex"

[@JoeTyler85]

Indy sure learn a few things there= love'em, leave'em lol

[@raghadshakir4415]

Is there a movie only about adler real life please

[@TheOneTakeLiveCast]

Max von sydow legend

[@TMX1138]

Here's a fun fact: Max von Sydow is in the upcoming Star Wars Episode VII.

[@tertiary7]

THAT'S where I recognize him from.

[@nething94]

Who is Love, not what is love... :)

[@jgcooper]

too bad they didnt do jung justice, just made freud runt he whole thing =/

[@Elamankokemuksenasiantuntija]

Love is unfortunately a very complicated and multifaceted subject, and therefore extremely difficult to explain to a prepubescent child. When the psychodynamic theories were being developed by Freud, Jung and Adler (in addition to many other practitioners), there wasn't that much research on psychology that would've been done outside of case studies on individuals. In other words, both reliable and valid experiments that could precisely generalize traits/phenomena and could be applicable on every human person spanning a variety of cultures weren't really all that common yet. Obviously, at this time period the theories didn't hold the whole picture of love and in this depiction love isn't really expressed in a very exact manner. For example Freud is visibly asphyxiated only on sexuality (pun not intended) which isn't necessarily the entire picture of love. So here goes my understanding of love based on some stuff I've learned so far from experience and textbooks: There's three kinds of love with varying levels of attachment. There's platonic love that's akin to friendships, romantic love which refers to established companionships (i.e dating) and love in a parent-child relationship (parental love). In this clip they were referring to romantic love so I'll be only discussing that here. Like everything in psychology, we have three main levels of review: biological, psychological (includes cognition, emotion and motivation) and sociocultural. From a biological standpoint love has a lot to do with things like affect (like different kinds of arousal like sexual for example), the nervous system and its relationship with different neurotransmitters and hormones; and of course the central nervous system that includes the brain. So basically everything our brain holds is part of love in a neurobiological level of review. For example love could spark infatuation which starts from hormonal changes, it could activate the sympathetic nervous system and cause a flight or flight -response or activate the sympathetic nervous system that relaxes the body, lowers cortisol levels and slows breathing/pulse. There could be sexual arousal that leads to sexual behaviour which releases dopamine (hormone affiliated with the reward system), endorphins (feel good -hormone) and oxytocin (a hormone affiliated with intimacy and closeness). There's also an evolutionary explanation of love and Freud actually points out to that a lot: love is designed to motivate individuals to reproduce, pass down genes and survive. Love is also a deeply psychological experience. It involves a variety of emotions from the basic emotions (happiness, sorrow, anger, fear, disgust and amazement) to more complex, so-called social emotions (for example jealousy, shame, guilt, empathy and pride). It also holds different moods like depressive moods after rejection. There are several motivational aspects to love as well. Yes, sexual intercourse is one motivator, but then there are things like belonging, safeness and attachment which are both externally and intrinsically motivating. John Bolwbys and Mary Ainsworth's attachment theory depicts the need of safety and intimacy; it's also reflective in romantic relationships. The relationship with cognition and more specifically schemas, identity and efficacy is strong when paired with motivation and the attachment theory. Usually a healthy romantic relationship upholds a positive sense of self which reflects in a more positive and optimistic outlook on life and belief in one's capability and high self-worth and -confidence; a higher self-esteem. And lastly love is also a sociocultural phenomena. It's usually affiliated to things like intimacy, inseparability and vulnerability. The understanding of love or the picture love is given is dependent on culture. In its common understanding in western society, it involves at least two individuals. So yeah... There was my terrible, abstract essay about love. Thanks for reading, I guess. Please let me know how wrong I am on absolutely everything; that would be much appreciated. Oh and not everything has to do with sexual relations Freud. Romantic bonds can form without sexuality. It's called asexuality. Right... I'm done now. Cheers.

[@cuckmulligan7602]

Did they switch the casting for Jung and Adler?

[@oleghrozman4172]

I disagree that love was INVENTED. Especialy in the medieval age. There are a lot of very-very old and ancient love-artifacts were found in the middle east (Babylon, Assyria, Sumer). 5000 B.C.-10000 B.C.

[@noahsecades4241]

Did they know that back in 1908 though?

[@hendricha]

same here, I'm guessing they could have solved some long lasting issues XD

[@RJRJ]

6:11 ..."Use a condom"

[@charlemagnetheFranks]

Nothing is an obstacle unless you say it is. Wally Amos No I'm not going to shout it out loud today 😁💔

[@dishliquid]

2:56 Lol

[@zamanium7517]

Фрейд без Юнга водка без пива

[@johunter4733]

I completely disagree with Freud. Love is not borne out of sex. If that was the case, all one night stands will become problematic. Love is a standalone feeling that doesn't not even need reciprocation. It is clean and pure and whether or not, it stays that way is up to the individual. Sex is a physical act and can be akin to a blissful union or a trip to the toilet (or being the toilet), depending on how you treat the act.

[@Kythos]

Everyone disagrees with Freud yet he remains to be a very popular figure in psychology.

[@magdalenadobosz1008]

I like how they speculate what love is.Love is a feeling towards person ,you want relive beautiful moments with that person might be sex as well which is desire coming from love ,important is only who you choose to love as you love your child different way ,than your brother sister parents ,friends obviously you like and also share your life with them as simple as that.

[@manzero134gd]

Don't say you disagree with him or else he will faint again.

[@eyesofpicasso]

Is that max von sydow?

[@niroshanperera6323]

YES

[@nething94]

For Freud, sex is numen...

[@user-kw7mr6xt9n]

This is making me laugh so hard

[@patrikisgod]

They don't write like this anymore :)

[@septan4168]

Where is Freud's cocaine????

[@สมชายจึงสิริพิพัฒน์พร-ส6ธ]

😑สังคมโดน❔⚖️❓ควบคุม พฤติกรรม ระหว่าง ใครต่อใคร ดุจ everywhere ดั่ง everytime ดัง ผู้มี อิทธิพลกำหนด ย้ำ อิทธิพลกำหนด ย้ำๆ อิทธิพล everything for กำหนด something of ความต้องการ ก่อน ปรารถนา หลัง อยากได้ใคร่มีความรักๆเลิกๆเล่นๆสำส่อนทางเพศด้วยอารมส์(อยู่เหนือเหตุผล)ล้วนๆโดย อัตชีวประวัติศาสตร์บุคคลสำคัญๆ somebody เป็นตัวอย่างแก่ everybody แต่ละคนละคน 🇹🇭ขอรับ🧭 📚ครับผมดีกว่าคุณๆเธอเข้าใจทุกๆท่าน📲 🌏สาธุๆๆ👀

[@aashikaashik9694]

Movie name?

[@ddtphoenix1265]

The problem with this discussion is that you can not understand love with the intellect

[@mysigt_]

DDTPhoenix 12 ridiculous

[@ddtphoenix1265]

What do you know about love anyways, me from three years ago

[@mysigt_]

DDTPhoenix 12 Tell em

[@RodrigoFarias-vc1nm]

Jung's way too old!

[@user-gk8gk8uh5j]

i want name of this movie

[@uzernam303]

Late reply, but it's a TV Series named "The Adventures of Young Indiana Jones" or "The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles", not 100% which is the official title. lol

[@ayannaarceo6915]

WOW

[@alihammadshah]

Dude had his balls touching the earth I don't know what kind of a deviant was he to keep talking about sex. His psychology was probably his sexual medicine. Abhorrent to anchor your world view in sex which is lowly act that even animals perform, instead of some higher human value or something.

[@Zehr-Ask]

Hangi film bu

[@lordcal123]

I've personally never seen an entire episode of Young Indiana Jones, but I personally do not like Star Wars: Clone Wars (the animated series).

[@josedavidbastocabrera8724]

Do you still have the same opinion?