Great people — those who have changed our way of looking at the world may be found under any category; the literature of both believers and nonbelievers is enormous. But to my mind, the greatest Atheist of the 20th century was Sigismund Schlomo Freud (1856- 1939). His invention of what he called psychoanalysis was as important and novel for the soul as was Einstein’s theory of relativity for physics.
In works such as “Totem and Taboo” (1913), “The Future of an Illusion” (1927), “Civilization and Its Discontents” (1930), and others, Freud made clear his adherence to the “scientific weltanschauung” which precluded blind beliefs in the supernatural, ancient cosmologies, and empirical impossibilities. How is it, Freud asked himself, that so many people, in almost every aspect of life, are guided by common sense, pragmatic outcomes, evidence, corroboration, the “proof,” so to speak, “in the pudding, and the taste of the pudding”; except when it comes to their spiritual life, in which case they throw all empirical criteria out the window in order to let the most outlandish and absurd superstitions come in the front door, dressed in the guise of absolute Truth, bearing false gifts of eternal blessedness and bearing the sword of everlasting damnation?
Freud did not think it worthwhile to debate particular points of theology, as plenty of our best minds had done that before him, since the 16th century, when holy Christians burned heretics at the stake. Rather he wanted to take that divine clown in the doorway, Mr. (or Mrs. or Mz) Religion, and psycho-analyze him (or her) — to put religion to the couch.
Freud concluded that religion, pure and simple, was an illusion, in this case an individual and collective one — an obsessional neurosis. An illusion and a delusion differ only in degree, based on the amount of wish fulfillment involved. Just as in dreams we make wishes come true (in a disguised way) which are prohibited in reality, so religion is group dream, for it offers just what us poor finite mortals lack in reality — it promises to right all wrongs, conquer death, and give us consolation for all we must renounce as well as an afterlife of bliss in the light of all the bumps and pain we suffer on the way to an otherwise meaningless death. People will just not let go of entrenched illusions. Then what is there left? Truth? Science? A better story? Freud ends “The Future of An Illusion,” with these words: “No, our science is no illusion. But an illusion it would be to suppose that what science cannot give us we can get elsewhere.”
Freud did not dismiss religion lightly, as he knew it was intimately connected to the process of civilization, but he thought we could do better if we sent it packing back to dreamland. In “Civilization and Its Discontents” he spoke more of this process. This process Freud considered difficult due to the demands it made with respect to the renunciation of our instincts. There would always be those sociopaths and neurotics who could not bear the frustrations required. His conception of human nature was akin to Hobbes’s (Hommo homini lupis — “Man is wolf to man”). In other terms we are dominated by Eros (the sex or life drive), and Thanatos (the death wish or aggression). These drives are in perpetual conflict with each other and at times overwhelm us regardless of moral or ethical proscriptions. What is more, besides public law and coercion, we internalize harsh task masters Freud called the “super ego” or “uber ich.” In this case when we are driven to follow our wild horse, we develop the pain of Guilt, blaming ourselves for our natural propensities. Religion adds to this self-recrimination with its concept of sin. Such is part of the cost of civilization. Other times people satisfy both the drives of Eros and aggression by forming “brotherhoods” of like minded individuals (the in-group) while they seek to destroy anyone who is different (their neighbors). At other times, the death wish could reign uncontrolled with “death cults” and suicide bombers, overriding the instinct for self- preservation. Such is our brave new world.
Freud thought the commandment, “Love thy neighbor as thyself” was ridiculous. We could love ourselves, or our kin, but the natural approach toward our neighbor is aggression. On the other hand, true friendship has its survival value, and makes us stronger. Accordingly, if we face the truth, and admit that what we call “evil” is within us, we will be able to work at friendship based on our common interests.
Freud thought too that education would improve if we put a little reality into the curriculum. This is no honky dory world of gumdrops and lemon trees where everyone is nice and all endings are happy ever after. In a footnote to “Civilization and Its Discontents” he says, “education is behaving as though one were to equip people starting on a polar expedition with summer clothing and maps of the Italian Lakes.”
Puzzle
1. There is a common item on or near most office desks. Its name consists of two words, usually hyphenated. If you put an “S” in front of each word, you will get two other words which are synonyms. So what is that office item?
