Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Nature of sigmund freud
Disagreement with Freud's theories
The impact of ideas of sigmund freud on society today
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Nature of sigmund freud
Sigmund Freud; Father of the psychoanalytic school of psychology, was not a friend to religious belief. Freud’s understanding of religion, to put it bluntly, was that of an illusion. That is to say, not necessarily false, but developed in response to the need to overcome the conflict between our sexual natures and the nature of civilisation. From this, we can attempt to critique said theory in order to see how “valid” it really is in the face of religion. For Freud’s position to be truly valid, we have to prove that the Oedipus complex is a fully universal sexual trauma, and that buried trauma can really manifest itself in the form of religion. He believed himself to have proved both of these conclusively, and in turn, believed that because of the oppressive nature of religion, it should be overthrown. However, in light of recent research, very few of Freuds theories on religion seem to hold any water. And this is where this essay begins.
The place to start (in theory) is to critique the methodological issues behind Freud. As is common practice in the Psychodynamic field of psychology, Freud developed a generalized version of his theory from a limited amount of very carefully selected case studies, often from patients whom exhibited behaviours of extreme proportions (e.g. The Wolf Man; Sergei Pankejeff) . Although studies of extreme behaviours allow the psychologist to study said behaviours far easier, it would be illogical to assume that the traits exhibited would be applicable to the general public.
Naturally, it can be said that Freud was a man of revolutionary intellect, but his tendency to take mere speculations and present them as facts is the net stop on the disassembly of his theories on religion. Freud used Darwins theo...
... middle of paper ...
...ncept at best, as most people who engage in distraction activities are more than aware of why and what they are doing it for. To put it simply, I believe that outside of the fundamental ideas of the psychodynamic school (and even occasionally within that branch of psychology) his theories just aren’t applicable.
Works Cited
1. Marcy, L. (Eds) Voelker, “Bronislaw Malinowski,” http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/information/biography/klmno/malinowski_bronislaw.html.
2. Michael Palmer, Freud and Jung on religion (London ;;New York: Routledge, 1997).
3. Cherry, K., “Freud and Religion - Freud's Views on Religion,” http://psychology.about.com/od/sigmundfreud/p/freud_religion.htm.
4. Jordan et, al, Philosophy of religion : for A level, for OCR, OCR ed. (Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes, 2004).
5. “Sigmund Freud - Bibliography,” http://www.freudfile.org/bibliography.html.
of this essay is to identify the influence Marx and Nietzsche had on Freud’s critique of
Both Lewis and Freud agreed that the question of god’s existence and our response must be asked. Though each man had drastically different worldviews and answers, they each sought to learn and understand the other’s worldview. Nicholi points out that Lewis may have had an advantage in the understanding of the unbeliever’s worldview due to the fact that until the age of 30, he claimed to be “even more certain of his atheism than was Freud” (2002, Pg. 81). In his adult life, Freud had no dramatic change of worldview from believer to unbeliever like Lewis had. This fact may give Lewis a slight upper hand in the understanding of the unbeliever’s worldview; however, Freud was still one of the greatest minds of his times and his work proves a strong (though negative) understanding of the believer’s worldview.
Westen, D. (1998). The scientific legacy of Sigmund Freud: toward a psychodynamically informed psychological science. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 333.
Similar to Marx, Freud believes humans simply make up the idea of God in explanation to things science could not disprove. Humans take relationships from our Earthly fathers and compare it to our Heavenly father. According to Freud, “Religion is an attempt to master the sensory world in which we are situated by means of the wishful world which we have developed within us as a result of biological and psychological necessities.” (H/R,p.26) Science can neither prove or disprove religion. Freud chooses to believe science and claims religion is only comforting and hopeful thinking to our purpose after
After reading this week’s readings, I decide to focus my attention on Freud’s Civilization and Its Discontents, and to briefly touch on pragmatic views. I can see the similarities between the two, were religion, philosophy and science all intertwines, as it relates to finding truth or should I say truth as it relates to achieving certain goals in order to support social values and needs. The implications that what is true, may not necessarily be true, and that any and all knowledge that contributes to human values, can be interpreted as truth. Pragmatists contend that most philosophical topics should be viewed in terms of their practical uses and successes and that knowledge can be evaluated from the goals that this knowledge is able to support
...othing more than repressed contents, these contents being constellated around the figure of the father. (Palmer, 1997, 164). It would seem that Freud went above and beyond to dispel religion as a healthy essential practice for the growth of society but rather saw it as a weakness. That many of Freud’s theories have stood the test of time is tantamount to his title as the ‘Father of Psychoanalysis’ although many have been tweaked or adjusted to suit today’s conditions. It would be unwise to completely ignore Freud’s views on religion but I think we can conclude that they are somewhat flawed.
Peterson, Michael - Hasker, Reichenbach and Basinger. Philosophy of Religion - Selected Readings, Fourth Edition. 2010. Oxford University Press, NY.
In the first two chapter of the book, Freud explores a possible source of religious feeling. He describes an “oceanic feeling of wholeness, limitlessness, and eternity.” Freud himself is unable to experience such a feeling, but notes that there do indeed...
In the midst of his already successful career, Sigmund Freud decided to finally dedicate a book of his to religion, referring to the subject as a phenomena faced by the scientific community. This new work, Totem and Taboo, blew society off its feet, ultimately expanding the reaches of debates and intellectual studies. From the beginning, Freud argues that there exists a parallel between the archaic man and the contemporary compulsive. Both these types of people, he argues, exhibit neurotic behavior, and so the parallel between the two is sound. Freud argues that we should be able to determine the cause of religion the same way we determine the cause of neurosis. He believes, since all neuroses stem from childhood experiences, that the origins of this compulsive behavior we call religion should also be attributed to some childhood experiences of the human race, too. Freudian thought has been dominant since he became well known. In Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans, religion becomes entirely evident as a major part of the novel, but the role it specifically plays is what we should question. Therefore, I argue that Freud’s approach to an inborn sense of religion and the role it plays exists in The Last of the Mohicans, in that the role religion plays in the wilderness manifests itself in the form of an untouchable truth, an innate sense of being, and most importantly, something that cannot and should not be tampered with.
Freud, Sigmund. 1953-74. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works. 24 vols, trans. James Stachey. London: Hogarth.
Erich Fromm in his psychoanalytical approach to religion is distinct from the earlier works of Sigmund Freud. Fromm defines religion as “any system of thought and action shared by a group which gives the individual a frame of orientation and an object of devotion.” Fromm argues that irreligious systems including all the different kinds of idealism and “private” religions deserve being defined as a “religion.” Based on Fromm’s theory, it is explained that there is no human being who does not have a “religious need,” almost every part of human life reflects religious need and its fulfillment, in fact he states it to be “inherent” in man.
The aim of this essay is to clarify the basic principles of Freud’s theories and to raise the main issues.
Goodwin, A. (1998). Freud and Erikson: Their Contributions to the Psychology of God-Image Formation. Pastoral Psychology, 47(2), 97-117. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
The methods he used to obtain his information and data raised questions by other scientists. His research on children was lacking, as was his use of empirical studies, his research was male-dominated and also lacked universality. The theory of the id, ego and superego develops from birth into childhood therefore the use of case studies on adults and the lack of empirical study does not seem feasible enough to have developed this theory. First of all there is no guarantee that the memories of these adults on their childhood would be accurate, there was not any factual, re-testable data so it lacked reliability and validity secondly each case and person’s experience is different and therefore cannot be use to determine the development of an entire population. Freud’s theory was further biased due to him overlooking social and environmental aspects, which prevent universality; he was a European man who researched other upper middle class Europeans whose everyday living and circumstances differed greatly from others in
Hopfe, L. M., & Woodward, M. R. (2007). Religions of the World (10th ed.) New Jersey: Prentice Hall.