Sigmund Freud is no longer the revered figure he once was. A recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education noted that Freud is no longer routinely assigned even in psychology curricula. In a way, Freud is following the downpath path of that other great totem of the last couple of centuries, Karl Marx. It's hard to believe so many intelligent people spent their lives studying these two thinkers. Intellectuals, we have to conclude, are often fatally attracted to far-out theories that tease the mind but that bear little relation to what's actually going on in the world.
Marxism worked well in academic laboratories and only failed miserably when it was actually tried. Similarly for decades Freud spun out his elaborate theories, and they sounded so scientific and so modern and so avant garde. Depression? Well, that's because your sister abused you when you were four, and you have concealed from yourself the memory of it, but if you do hundreds of hours of therapy, you can excavate the source of your anxiety, and by coming to terms with it you can slowly overcome it. But today when you go to the doctor and are diagnosed with depression, he gives you a pill and you feel better. No need for most people to visit the therapist's couch.
Freud also argued that what we are secretly attracted to, we make into a taboo. Freud explained the "incest taboo" by saying that we secretly want to have sex with our mothers and our sisters, and so we repress those feelings and and outlaw them. The cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker pointed out the shortcoming of this theory. Pinker notes that by Freud's logic the fact that humans are averse to eating cow dung shows that we secretly want to eat it. Pinker's point is that there are sound evolutionary reasons both for avoiding cow dung and for avoiding incest. The former is unhealthy and attracts disease-carrying insects; the latter results in biological abnormalities. So natural selection produces humans who avoid both. Once again, Freudian fantasy is replaced with a much more plausible scientific alternative.
I've been reading Freud's The Future of an Illusion, where Freud makes the case that religion is a form of "wish fulfillment." We forget that Freud is the original author of this slogan that is so widely repeated in our time. How often do we hear people say, "People only believe in Christianity because they want it to be true." Well, let's examine this Freudian explanation in an entirely secular and rational way.
Imagine a bunch of people who have gathered in a room because they want to avoid life's difficulties--sickness, suffering, death--by making up a religion that will make them feel better. I can entirely see how such a group would come up with the concept of heaven. Heaven is a place where there is no suffering and no death. Eternal bliss would surely fit into my wish-fulfillment scheme.
But I don't see why this group would come up with the concept of hell. (We are not talking about why priests might later use the concept to enforce doctrinal obedience or institutional loyalty. We are talking about why wish-fulfilling humans would invent the concept in the first place.) Hell is not only worse than sickness but also worse than death, because death is merely the end, while hell implies eternal separation from God. I also don't see why seekers of wish-fulfillment would come up with Christian morality. Who needs the Ten Commandments or other such rules which make our lives more difficult by asserting a series of "Thou Shall Nots"? A mandate for wish-fulfillment would seem to dictate a much more libertine social morality.
Bottom line: Judaism and Christianity, not to mention the other great religions, hardly look like they are the product of mere wishful thinking. In fact, they posit a God and a moral universe that makes some fairly stern demands on humans. It's almost wishful to think that God does not exist, so that we can escape those demands. This is a point that does not seem to have occurred to poor Sigmund Freud.
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 3)
16. I saw this poor post out on Philosophy St. begging for questions.
oneblood at 7:16PM on Jul 30th 2008
17. I dont think anyone is coming.
CaptainCack at 9:23AM on Jul 31st 2008
18. "Wish-fulfilling humans" who get sick, suffer and die would come up with the concept of hell to explain what happens to the people who cause their suffering.
That didn't require much thought... I'm surprised you wouldn't see that given five minutes of thought. Oh, right, it doesn't support your position.
Ryan Anderson at 9:46AM on Jul 31st 2008
19. Also, do you really think religion existed at any point in isolation from priest who "enforce doctrinal obedience or institutional loyalty"? There is evidence that Neanderthals practiced religion. It's reasonable to conclude that there were Neanderthal priest who "enforce doctrinal obedience or institutional loyalty".
My point is that the 100% of the existence of Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity and Islam has included the influence of priests seeking to control.
Ryan Anderson at 9:52AM on Jul 31st 2008
20. I would think that priests were enforcing doctrinal obedience or institutional loyalty long before those people came up with Heaven and Hell. As long as there were groups of people, there were those seeking to be in charge of those people; by any means necessary.
Trying to use Freud against us is pretty dumb. I bet DD thinks Freud was one of the Athiest patriarchs whose fall would crush our not-spirits and convert us to the one false faith.
CaptainCack at 10:02AM on Jul 31st 2008
21. This is a leftover blog... why didn't he just use it for this week, i.e. change the date? It is not quite the same as a "new" blog...
Shannie at 10:16AM on Jul 31st 2008
22. So then you think it more likely that god created hell, rather than the idea of hell occurring to a bunch of people who are thinking? Allrightythen...
You can't imagine that? And here I thought you a writer of fiction.
America's Most Gangsta at 10:31AM on Jul 31st 2008
23. Ryan,
Interesting point. I think that there are sections in at least Christianity and Judaism that have replaced the authority of the priest, with the authority of the Christian scriptures or the Tanakh.
Your assertion has merit in so far as illiteracy was rampant, when there were texts involved. For non-monotheistic (pantheists, henotheists, spiritists, etc.) groups, the spiritual guide (shaman, witch-doctor) seemed more a part of set tribal rituals. Meaning his/her? existence was determined by the rituals and how he/she fit into them so to speak.
That's my proposition. Whatcha think?
oneblood at 10:33AM on Jul 31st 2008
24. But I don't see why this group would come up with the concept of hell. (We are not talking about why priests might later use the concept to enforce doctrinal obedience or institutional loyalty. We are talking about why wish-fulfilling humans would invent the concept in the first place.)-DD
Of course you wouldn't understand. Before Christianity was invented the ancients understood dual concepts within their everyday lives. If there was a heaven its opposite counterpart also had to exist. Just as the good gods equal counterpart is the evil Satan, or which ever entity was the cause of all evil which the good god had no control over. Wishful thinking humans would want to know that all injustices that weren't rectified in their lifetime would receive their punishment eventually, just as good deeds were rewarded with its opposite counterparts of heaven.
Bottom line: Judaism and Christianity, not to mention the other great religions, hardly look like they are the product of mere wishful thinking. In fact, they posit a God and a moral universe that makes some fairly stern demands on humans. It's almost wishful to think that God does not exist, so that we can escape those demands. This is a point that does not seem to have occurred to poor Sigmund Freud.-DD
Only later in religious history did man posit a god that demands stern moral behavior. But maybe before and certainly from earlier literature we see that morality was used to prevent the human species from going extinct. We know from cave panting that early thinking man were witnesses to the extinction of many species and if it wasn't for these paintings these animals would not be remembered. Gilgamesh's feared the extinction of his culture more so than his death, he hopes that his legend will be written down and remembered for all time. This was also a role of the son of man who would always redeem mankind and save humanity from extinction. Even Abraham showed concern that he would not produce an heir though seed while never mentioning fear for his own death. Early man understood extinction and realized that certain behaviors and taboos were not beneficial to their kind. We are equipped with this instinct to prevent extinction and being human we defined what was good and what was bad to prevent it.
And just as 99% of species go extinct along with their cultures and faiths, one day Christianity will too be extinct as new concepts and understanding of life change with human understanding of the universe around us. The bible will be placed on the back shelf next to a copy of Freud.
goddess1prevail at 10:45AM on Jul 31st 2008
25. Its new in that it only had one commentor when I found it.
CaptainCack at 10:48AM on Jul 31st 2008
26. Well Captain,
We are all here now!!
goddess1prevail at 10:49AM on Jul 31st 2008
27. Hey, DD. I got some news for you. Some patients do not tolerate head meds (they wrecked my kidneys and thyroid, and worsened my depression)so for many of us mental whack-jobs, TALK therapy works better than popping a pill that has little research, is dangerous to a significant portion of patients. Today, still, simply admitting a mental illness continues to carry a hell of a lot of stigma attached.
Do you honestly think we are all built the same when you "pop our hood" and check out our engines? This body wasn't made by Fischer, and many meds work in reverse for me. 18 years on the psychiatric wheel robbed me of my quality of life, only to have to Dx turn out to be wrong all along. I am med free and back in the world again, except for having to deal with the disabling effect those meds had on my organs, glands, and muscle tissues. There's a place in the world for "excitable people". We tend to get a lot of stuff done, when some freak MD doesn't decide we need to be a guinea pig to see just how incapable they can render us.
web jones at 10:53AM on Jul 31st 2008
28. Oneblood; I think you are correct. Today the individuals have a lot more control. That's probably why there are so many denominations. I could technically just stay at home, read the bible, come up with my own doctrine, and never go to church and consider myself a "Christian". Today, no one is going to burn me at the stake for that.
Except that the bible was (in my opinion) created by priests and in many parts, designed to control. So there still is priestly influence.
Ryan Anderson at 10:56AM on Jul 31st 2008
29. D'Stupid asks why anyone would invent a Hell.
The sandbox must be really shallow today. "Hell" was invented by God-Nazis to scare the crap outta the congregants to extort them. Who, that was easier than making fun of Gassbag.
Hell counterpoints heaven so ignorant clods like MiW, Observe-Gnat and JaneSophie can feel good about themselves as the viscously send people that didn't join their fan-club away from the Sorority. They can imagine that, by degrading folks that do things they don't like, they get to go to Big Rock Candy Mountain while everyone else goes to their Heavenly Sadist's Eternal Burn Unit.
That's why the Myth of Hell exists: to try and keep the Rubes in line, jaws slacked and wallets opened.
T.Brough at 11:14AM on Jul 31st 2008
30. DD...
It's no secret that humans are motivated by both carrots and sticks, both positive and negative reinforcement. It's in our basic biology...we get dopamine rewards from our brains for doing the right things (say, exercise) and pain sensations for doing the wrong things (sticking your hand in a fire).
You are right that it is easy to come up with the idea of heaven as a place to be away from the pain and discomfort that is part of human existance. The concept of hell is also easy to see as a human invention...a "stick" or negative reinforcement...that allowed the Church or other powers-that-be control the actions of people living in group settings. It you tell people they will go to hell for stealing or killing, they might think twice about it. But it also allowed the Church to make itself the seat of power...the only place where one could go to avoid ultimately finding one's self in Hell. Just like all of the other rituals and trappings of salvation (baptism, confimation, communion, confession) which you had to go to Church in order to get ....and, of course, while you are in Church you better tith your wages or you'll go to Hell.
Yes, Heaven was the reward you reaped if you did what the authorities told you and Hell was your punishment for not towing the line.
C'mon DD...it doesn't take much imagination to see that these are all man-made ideas.
John Galt
John Galt at 11:42AM on Jul 31st 2008