23 ebook – titles of 35 ‘physical’ volumes

approx. 11,600 pages

Electronic title recordings are available.

The Vienna University Library was founded in 1365 and is one of the oldest university libraries in the German-speaking world. The main building was completed in 1884, and the “Great Reading Room” (see photo) has been beautifully preserved in its original condition.

The Vienna University Library holds the “legal deposit” right for publications from Vienna, Lower Austria, and Burgenland. As a result, the Vienna University Library’s holdings include many first editions from publishers based in the city of Vienna and these two Austrian provinces.

So what could be more appropriate than to publish an ebook edition from a center of Austrian psychology and the ‘birthplace’ of psychoanalysis (we will initially ignore relevant developments in Zurich), with content from first editions (not exclusively) of the following authors, who could be considered pioneers of Austrian psychology * :

Baron Ernst von Feuchtersleben

Alexius Meinong

Sándor Ferenczi

Otto Rank

Wilhelm Stekel

We find it interesting that an early work by Baron Ernst von Feuchtersleben is part of our edition with the intriguing title “On the Certainty and Dignity of Healing, or Physicians and the Public,” first published in 1839. Von Feuchtersleben began writing early on, initially as a poet, but he continued to do so throughout his life. In 1835, he also received his medical doctorate, and from then on, he was considered a ‘philosophizing physician.’ In some of his works, he primarily addresses “the non-medical public.” For these reasons we regard this author as a forerunner of Austrian psychology, an understanding which we share with others: “Feuchtersleben was certainly a precursor of the fuller knowledge of psychiatry which we now possess; in addition, he appeared to have had all the qualities of a great physician” (Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2 Dec. 1953, p. 194).

Alexius Meinong’s work was groundbreaking: in 1882, he moved to the Karl-Franzen University in Graz, where, primarily with Franz von Brentano, he established a psychological experimental laboratory at the University of Graz’s Psychological Institute. Experimental psychological studies were conducted there, giving rise to the famous Graz School of Psychology. In their psychological theories, these psychologists placed particular emphasis on concepts such as “wholeness” and “psychic acts,” which were essential determinants for describing—and possibly understanding—human behavior. The Graz School sought to achieve scientifically verifiable results—hence the laboratory—which contrasts with the more philosophical approaches of various psychological theories, including psychoanalysis.

In specialist literature, the term Graz School is sometimes understood to mean Austrian psychology in general; we do not share this view.

The Viennese School of Psychology includes in particular works by S. Rohracher and Sigmund Freud, both authors of which are not represented in our edition.

Recently, it seems interesting to question the extent to which Friedrich Nietzsche paved the way for Freudian psychoanalysis. Michel Onfray wrote about this in his book “Anti Freud: Psychoanalysis Disenchanted” (German edition, 2011). It seems crucial for Onfray that Freud always tried to deny any connection between his psychoanalysis and Nietzsche’s work. Mimoun Azizi’s book argues this point even more deeply (see below).

By including works by Sándor Ferenczi, Wilhelm Stekel and Otto Rank in our edition, we have deliberately published titles at the interface between psychology and/or psychoanalysis.

As a result of the political turmoil following World War I and the collapse of the Dual Monarchy in 1918, Sándor Ferenczi lost his professorship in Budapest, becoming increasingly isolated in his work. Nevertheless, Sándor Ferenczi served as President of the International Psychoanalytic Association (IAP) from 1918 to 1919, but was subsequently forced to relinquish this position to Ernest Jones.

Sándor Ferenczi was also friends with Otto Rank; both of them developed the text “Developmental Goals of Psychoanalysis” in 1924. For Ferenczi, individual childhood experiences were particularly—and perhaps for the first time with such emphasis—at the center of psychoanalytic interest.

For good reason, we have published Wilhelm Stekel’s ten-volume work “Disorders of Drive and Affective Life” in ten ebooks. Although these Stekel works are not first editions, we believe Wilhelm Stekel—along with Alfred Adler and Carl Gustav Jung (Zurich)—is one of the pioneers who significantly influenced and contributed to the early development of psychoanalysis.

However, as so often happens, a rift arose between Sigmund Freud and Wilhelm Stekel: Stekel disagreed with Freud’s assertion that actual neuroses were exclusively determined by sexual misconduct. Moreover, Stekel surpassed Freud in appreciating the pure imagery of a manifest dream and basing his psychological interpretations on it.

Incidentally, Freud’s break in relations with Adler and Jung is said to have arisen because both authors “discovered” Nietzsche’s work in Freud’s psychoanalysis, speculates Mimoun Azizi (Nietzsche, Freud and Psychoanalysis, 2017). This author even concludes that Nietzsche, not Freud, was the “discoverer” of psychoanalysis, without, however, using the term “plagiarism.”

Freud thus accepted that he had only had two “defective movements” (p. 91, see the following title note) in his life’s work – caused by “differences of opinion”: namely, the defective movements of Carl Gustav Jung and that of Alfred Adler. However, there is also speculation that Freud and Jung, respectively, had “intimate secrets” of each other, which, however, were not discussed. And it was unclear how these individual, intimate insights could be exploited within the association… This elephant in the room ultimately led to the complete separation of Freud and Jung in early 1913.

Regarding Stekel, Freud remarked very disparagingly, “…Stekel is difficult to present to the public” (from: Freud, S., On the History of the Psychoanalytic Movement, GW X, p. 90). Unfortunately, this blasé remark by Freud about Wilhelm Stekel was adopted unfiltered by Ernest Jones in the first Freud biography and thus passed down. For this reason alone, we feel compelled to relativize this disrespectful Freudian remark about Stekel by means of our ebook title. And let’s not forget that Stekel, along with Adler, was a founding member of the “Psychological Wednesday Society”! Interestingly, this society was called the “Psychological Wednesday Society” and not the “Psychoanalytic Wednesday Society.”

Stekel was editor-in-chief of the Zentralblatt.

Disagreements began as early as 1910 during the Nuremberg Congress regarding the election of the President of the International Psychoanalytic Association: Freud wanted the “Aryan CG Jung for life” (original wording) to be elected President of the IPA, which Stekel and Adler, in cooperation with the “Viennese Jews of the Association” (original wording), prevented.

Otto Rank (his original surname was Rosenfeld, which he changed to Rank in 1909) was introduced to the Wednesday Society in 1905 at the age of 21 through Alfred Adler’s mediation. Rank then studied German and philosophy at the University of Vienna. Otto Rank was very active within the fledgling psychoanalytic circle in Vienna, which naturally pleased Freud and benefited the “movement”: Rank was a co-founder and director of the International Psychoanalytic Publishing House, an early contributor to the Zentralblatt, and a contributor to the yearbook and editor of the International Journal of Medical Psychoanalysis.

In 1912, Otto Rank, together with Hanns Sachs (originally a lawyer, later also a non-medical psychoanalyst like Otto Rank), founded the journal Imago, a journal for the application of psychoanalysis to the humanities – incidentally with the express support of Freud, who was even the editor.

Otto Rank also wrote the first non-medical/psychoanalytic dissertation. It was rumored that Otto Rank was Freud’s “foster son.”

Starting in 1925, Freud introduced a “death instinct” as a psychological counterpart to his theory of the “sexual drive.” Rank was not particularly sympathetic to this idea, and other Freudian epigones also found this revised concept difficult to accept.

As a result, Rank increasingly distanced himself from Freud, and an estrangement developed between the two. For Rank, a person’s “willpower” became a dominant psychological variable. From 1926 onward, Otto Rank frequently stayed in Paris, eventually emigrating to the United States.

Freud was personally affected by this separation from Rank, but why the Freud/Rank/Psychoanalytic Society ultimately split up seems unclear.

On October 31, 1939, Otto Rank died unexpectedly in New York at the age of 55, one month after the death of his “foster father” Sigmund Freud.

A kind of epilogue: on April 24, 1932, Sigmund Freud wrote to Sándor Ferenczi: “I do not share your judgment about the worthlessness of the greater part of psychoanalytic literature, although I largely share your critical views. Without such rumination, recurrence in countless alterations, blends, and falsifications, assimilation of the material would not be possible. Nor do I believe that we will ever be able to supplement our diet with concentrated nutritional pills.” From: Catalog of the exhibition International Psychoanalytic Publishers 1919–1938, Vienna, 1995, p. 5.

Note: *We have attempted to locate any copyright information for individual works. Should we discover any copyright errors, please contact the copyright owner.