Sigmund Freud: The Unconscious and the Preconscious - Dialogue and Debate with Ancestral Knowledge
How can we speak of the unconscious and the preconscious as two receptors of livid activity, which are configured as experiences unfold throughout life, shaping the understanding of adaptive processes to the environment and territory in the construction of the conception of time and space as creations of experience? The preconscious and the conscious are not two separate powers, as if each were developing its activity independently of the other. Rather, they are related; one prefigures the other, and the other gives meaning. Thus, life in lividity is determined by sensations of pleasure and displeasure, which guarantee biological life in the integrity of the driving forces of the orgone and their livid pulsations. This activity, which gives meaning to the relationships between different parts of the body, means that just as organs suffer from ailments, so too does the psychic life suffer ailments in relation to its process of adaptation to the environment and reality.
As Freud shows, the sensations of pleasure and displeasure that shape the notion of reality and how we adapt to it can be modified by experiences that break the relationship between pleasure and displeasure. Thus, an experience that, in its lived experience, was not adapted to the libidinal forces can become a drive that alters the free circulation of the libido in psychic life. Experiences such as mistreatment and abuse are difficult to register in the libido and integrate into the images created within the ocean of passions, as Freud called it. In this way, one can live in a way that is not adaptive to the variations of the different libidinal manifestations that are configured in interpersonal and community relationships. Here, sleep should be valued as a form of psychic life that allows the course of the drive to be restored and returns it to its state of emancipation, where consciousness governs and regulates it. This pertains to the life of the unconscious and preconscious.
But how to transfer these experiences to ancestral peoples, who do not, so to speak, practice faith in the existence of a libido but rather in the existence of a totem or other figure that shapes their ways of relating, from which the perception and construction of relationships are built? How can we value, from a Freudian perspective, someone who believes that inside them there is perhaps a snake, or a fruit, or perhaps Mother Earth, and who works to live their psychic life in harmony with it? Undoubtedly, in these aspects, psychoanalysis and Freud's concepts, like other conceptions, such as religious ones, are constrained by their inability to penetrate the epistemological and ontological process of the construction of these other adaptations and understandings of interpersonal relationships and community life—an epistemological problem not only for psychology but also for ethnology and sociology, which reduces them to mere beliefs, and ignores and cannot To value the meaning in the consciousness of these peoples who are not only in rural areas but also in our cities, hence the need for more flexible human sciences, including theology, to be able to value and appreciate these other experiences
