Could anyone recommend me some essential literature about psychology?

Make up your own theories, they will be as valid as the known ones.

tl;dr: psychology is a pseudoscience

>>8249151
Personally I just read sumeries of fruid jung lacan and about current cognitive trends.

>>8249173
I have to say that despite the fact that lacan's ideas are not considered relevant i still found them extremely interesting and provocative.
Also, read deleuze's chizophrenia book.

>>8249179
and i suppose in some ways they are relevant since prominant philosophers like zizek make use of them in a societal context.

File: 1465845650986.jpg (52KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 600x338px

Psychoanalysis started when Freud wrote a second-rate essay on Dostoevsky.

So read Dostoevsky if you really want to understand human beings and not get bogged down with inferences, clinical detachment, biases on what "healthy" is, and jargon. The true scientists of psychology, behaviorists and neurologists, aren't literary in style since corroborating your findings with the scientific method means you can't whip up bullshit.

>>8249166
Go find someplace else to act like an arrogant buffoon, little stemfag.

>>8249229
purest post I've read in a while

>>8249229
Agreed

>>8249229
Yup. If you think Freud, Jung, Lacan, etc. are the embodiments of psychology as a field of thought, you have no idea what you're talking about.

>>8249151
>not being a normie means you're sick
What a great science.

>>8249229
>> Dostoevsky if you really want to understand human beings
>Dostoevsky.

That's not how you spell Shakespeare?

>>8249151
Piaget. What Freud, Jung, Lacan or Zizek thought about Dostoeyvsky or anyone else is irrelevant. Remember, OP said "psychology" not "psychoanalysis."

If what you're really after is psychoanalysis, I recommend starting with it's end: Deleuze. Or better yet, just skip the whole thing entirely.