# 4 Mentality of An Arsonist
Freud: Do you not know that I am the Devil?
Laforgue, René, Personliche Erinnerungen an Freud, Lindauer Psychotherapiewoche (1954), pp. 42-56, in Bakan, David, Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition, (1958, p. 181).
Fire, I bring you to burn
Reading Fraud is never straightforward unless you want to be fooled into believing his bizarre theories, fake dreams, and fictitious stories.
Freud's deceitful persona often hides under the disguise of a patient, another doctor, a medicine student, or a dreamer, just to name a few examples.
Of course, Freud wasn't writing openly about his madness - after all he had seen the insides of a lunatic asylum, unfortunately only as a doctor - but needing to confess, and unable to keep a secret, he had somehow to make the world aware of his ingenuity as a criminal without being locked up.
There's no doubt, when it comes to criminality Freud was, indeed, a mastermind, never apprehended, his activities ranging from "innocent" rapes to the cruellest murders. Everything was executed surreptitiously, avoiding punishment.
One of his less-known Freudian traits was his fascination with fire. And since anything and everything for Freud was in some way related to sex, so was the fire.
There is a simple correlation in Freud's mind between fire and sex: fire causes sexual excitement and sexual release. That's why he couldn't resist the urge to start fires.
Freud: A young man, a medical student and mad.
Freud’s confessions
Freud needed to share his madness with people. After all, it's not much fun to be a successful criminal and not be able to brag about it. Sadly, an open confession was not an option. Confess and get locked up for life? Freud wasn't that stupid.
Instead, he opted for a disguised confession. Thus, in his essay Obsessions and Phobias (1895), Freud aged 39, introduces "Case 2" of a
young man, a medical student - without a doubt, Freud - who reproached himself for all sorts of immoral acts: for having killed his cousin [nephew, John], for having violated his sister [sisters: Rosa and Anna], for having set fire to a house [Ringtheatre?], etc.
He got to the point of having to turn around in the street to see whether he had not killed the last passer-by.
Freud also provided a pseudo-explanation for the poor student's - his own - suffering, stating:
He had been much affected by reading in a quasi-medical book that masturbation, to which he was addicted, destroyed one’s morale. (1) No doubt, by providing references to killing, incest, and masturbation, Freud was obliquely talking about himself.
And what kind of book he read is obvious. It had nothing to do with medicine but all with pornography and perversions.
Most certainly, this is one of the most revealing of Freud’s confessions. Let's check out the facts:
1. Freud was a medical student,
2. He had killed his nephew, John,
3. He had violated, not one but two, maybe even all of his five sisters,
4. He was setting fires. And, last but not least,
5. He was addicted to masturbation that - a Freudian claim - destroyed his morale. (N.B. It is doubtful he had much morale to start with.)
Although it is not revealed what etc., that ends Freud's list of his perversions and crimes, stands for, without a doubt, it is more of the same, debauched and criminal, stuff.
Notably, the fear of having killed people in the street is analogous to Freud's other autobiographical confession appearing in the dream book, in which he described a highly cultured man [Freud] suffering from murderous inclinations, and having to account for all the persons he met while walking along the street. (2)
And, since all of Freud’s writings are largely autobiographical, this confession confirms that Freud was the person engaging in perverted and criminal acts.
Freud linked everything, also fire, to sex. He was a satyr.
Having sex with fire
Psychopathology of Everyday Life (1901)
In his psychopathological book, reflecting his psychopathology, Freud elaborated further on the fiery issue, stating that,
Heat, fire, the source of life, the waste of vital energy issuing from an upright, hollow tube ... the ideas of heat and fire ... unconsciously linked in his [own] mind with the idea of love ... there was [also] a strong masturbation complex present. (3)
Notably, Freud prudishly avoids mentioning the word penis, rather preferring to talk about a tube. And when he speaks of love, he means physical love, aka sex, of course. Freud wouldn't know what love is, even if it poked him into his black heart.
Thus, if we translate Freud's muddled sentence into something more readable, for Freud fire is a source of sexual pleasure, involving, and related to, masturbation and ejaculation. When he talks about the vital energy, Freud was a master of subterfuge, he means, of course, the sperm.
The Acquisition of Power Over Fire (1932)
In this article, published only seven years before his death – thus we can consider it his deathbed confession - regurgitating his psychopathological explanation, Freud explained that,
what a man harbours in his penis-tube is not fire. … it is the means of quenching fire; it is the water of his stream of urine. (4)
A very deep philosophical observation worth a genius. So, now we know that urine is not fire but mainly water.
By the way, a man doesn’t harbour urine in his penis-tube; it is the function of the bladder, but Freud didn’t learn much during the medical course that dealt with that issue.
The sexual gratification related to fire is classified as pyrophilia, a common occurrence in pyromaniacs like Freud. As he explained his motivation for fire setting: the warmth that is radiated by fire calls up the same sensation that accompanies a state of sexual excitation, and the shape and movements of a flame suggest a phallus in activity. (5)
Further, Freud explained the reason why pyromaniacs, like him, would "spray" sperm rather than urine on the fire:
when the penis is in the state of excitation … while the sensations are being experienced which suggest the warmth of fire, urination is impossible. (6)
Thus, urination is a no-go, but ejaculation is just fine, which is the (high) point of the whole fiery exercise.
Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis (1915),
As Freud further, and openly, explained in one of his lectures:
Kindling fire, and everything to do with it, is intimately interwoven with sexual symbolism. Flame is always a male genital, and the hearth is its female counterpart. (7)
In other words, the burning fire symbolises for Freud a heterosexual sex act.
So, there you have it, if you are a man and engage in intercourse with a female - a fiery enterprise, if you believe Freud - you are likely to burn your partner with your God-given penis. And if you're a woman, be prepared to bring a fire extinguisher to bed.
Freud's claim to greatness to having urinated on people.
Taking vengeance on people
Civilization and Its Discontents (1930
In his book about civilisation (that he hated) Freud again provided a somewhat different explanation of his motivation for setting fires. It was,
satisfying an infantile desire ... [of] putting it [fire] out with a stream of his urine. (8)
So, according to Freud, he had had the idea of setting fires and extinguishing them since his childhood. Possibly, he even acted on this idea in his childhood, too, which fits nicely in the McDonald triad.
As a support for the idea, Freud referred to a fictitious story about Gulliver and Gargantua, who were, putting out fire by micturating, which for Freud - since a flame for him was a symbolic penis - was, a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition. (9)
Without a doubt, this is Freud’s confession of his homosexual preferences. Unfortunately for the victims, Freud's urge for homosexual enjoyment was also his motivation for arson.
A case in point: during his stay in Paris - as he recounted in his dream book - Freud was sprinkling Paris with Freudian urine from the roof of Notre Dame.
The Interpretation of (fake) Dreams (1900)
As Freud believed, the stream of urine … is an unmistakable allusion to greatness. If we can believe him, since he was incontinent most of his life, Freud must indeed have been a great man. As he recounted, It is in this manner that Gulliver extinguishes the great fire in Lilliput. Even though Freud had never been to Lilliput, he was doing his thing in Vienna; depending on the degree of his excitation, extinguishing fires, he created, with either his own urine or seminal fluid, but never with both.
There was more to the question of urinating. As Freud explained, in this way, too, Gargantua … takes vengeance upon the Parisians … training his stream of urine upon the city.
Like Gargantua, urinating on the people below, Freud concluded that, here is another proof that I am the superman! (10).
As it is obvious, Freud believed that his urination, besides putting out fires, had other purposes. It was his way of confirming his greatness and taking vengeance upon the ordinary people he felt contempt for.
Did Freud really feel disdain for his fellow human beings?
Worthless humanity
This is what, in his letter, on July 28, 1929, to, one of his most dedicated female followers, Lou Andreas-Salome, Freud revealed about his view of humanity:
In the depths of my heart I can’t help being convinced that my dear fellow-men, with a few exceptions, are worthless. (11)
This is the quote from the letter edited by Freud's son, Ernst, and published in 1960.
Twelve years later, the new editor, Ernst Pfeiffer, without any compunction, significantly improved upon the previous version of the quote making it much more palatable for the reader. This is the new version:
In the depths of my being I remain convinced that my dear fellow creatures - with few exceptions - are a wretched lot. (12)
It doesn't take Einstein to realise the significant difference in the second version. Rather than describing his fellow men as worthless, it translates the expression as, a much more considerate, wretched, turning the psychopath into a Samaritan!
This is yet another example of turning mundane manure into precious fertiliser, the despicable monster turned into a compassionate "doctor". This is a blatant cover-up. And, even now, 80 years after Freud's demise - may he burn in hell - the cover-up continues.
No wonder that considering himself above the rest of the human race - after all, he believed, he was a superman - Freud had no compunction abusing, harming, raping, or even murdering people.
Freud, fire and women's anatomy
Bizarrely, although he had a valid point, regarding putting out fire. Freud claimed it was a woman's anatomy that, unlike in a man's case, made it impossible for her to yield to the temptation of this desire of urinating on the fire. Was this Freud’s explanation of why, like him, most arsonists are men?
Finally, Freud concluded that his, analytic experience testifies to the connection between ambition, fire and urethral erotism. (13)
Without a doubt, his imagining this kind of connection, is proof that Freud was seriously deranged. There you have it. If you are a pathologically ambitious man, like Freud was - if you believe him - you are likely not only to experience urethral erotism, but also likely to set fires.
As he explained, Freud's motivation for setting fires was the fact that the act of extinguishing fire with his urine or semen, but not both at the same time, gave the pyromaniacal Freud a sexual release. Without a doubt, Freud was the epitome of a murderous arsonist, notably, having no compunction to reveal his murderous character in writing.
Oddly, Freud's teachings became the new psychological bible for lots of psychoanalysts, doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, and more, during the major portion of the 20th century. This was like a viral infection, making people believe in Freudian unicorns.
(1) SE 3, p. 76.
(2) Freud, Sigmund, The Interpretation of Dreams, (1913, p. 321).
(3) SE 6, p. 249.
(4) SE 22, p. 188.
(5) SE 22, p. 190.
(6) SE 22, p. 192.
(7) SE 15, p. 162.
(8) SE 21, p. 90.
(9) SE 21, p. 91).
(10) 1913, p. 332.
(11) Freud, Sigmund, Letters of Sigmund Freud, 1873-1939, (1960 p. 390).
(12) Freud, Sigmund, Andreas-Salomé, Lou, Sigmund Freud and Lou Andreas-Salomé Letters, (1972, p. 182).
(13) SE 21, p. 90.