Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The interrelation between religion and society
Science v religion
Religion v science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The interrelation between religion and society
Nicholi’s book, “The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life” brings to light insightful perspectives from both Freud and Lewis that are based on their Atheistic (Freud) and Christian (Lewis) worldview. Throughout the book, I discovered an overarching theme of defining a meaningful life that was projected into their overall view. This being said, while both individuals had very different view points, there seemed to be a continued desire to outline key aspects of what constitutes a life worth living. Two aspects of life that I believe uniquely coincide with each other to form purpose in life are happiness and pain (suffering). In confronting these topics, it is essential to recognize that one cannot happen without the other. Why do people do what they do? The question that is the main driving force for psychology. According to Nicholi the answer is happiness, “no aspect of life is more desired, more elusive, and more perplexing than happiness” (pg. 97). I believe it is safe to say that life as it is, is centered around happiness, and people will do whatever it takes to obtain this goal of ‘becoming happy’. Freud and Lewis agree that happiness is the …show more content…
This simply validates the general pessimistic view that Nicholi mentions throughout the book. In his discussion, there is a point in which Freud brings religion into the debate, “(Religious faith) an attempt to procure a certainty of happiness and a protection against suffering…” (pg. 102). I can admit that this exact thought has crossed my mind even as a Christian. This concept that mankind has simply imagined God in order to cope with the various demands that life presents, can be challenging as a believer. This is where faith comes in, and faith to Freud was simply pronounced as
Society pressure themselves to be happy; they often ask questions like, “does that make you happy?” What they fail to understand is that sometimes doing the right thing, for the moment, might not seem to bring happiness in one’s life, but after trekking the ups and downs of life, happiness might be waiting on the other side. From time to time people also judge good and bad through happiness. “If something is good, we feel good. If something is
Religion has been a controversial topic among philosophers and in this paper I am focusing
In 2002, Doctor Armand Nicholi, Jr. sought to put two of the greatest minds of the 20th century together to debate the answer to the lifelong question, “Is there a God, and if so, how should we respond to his existence?” Nicholi is the first scholar to ever put the arguments of C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud side by side in an attempt to recreate as realistic of a debate as possible between the two men. He examines their writings, letters, and lectures in an attempt to accurately represent both men in this debate. His result, the nearly 300 page book, The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life, is one of the most comprehensive, well researched, and unbiased summaries of the debate between the worldviews of “believer and unbeliever” (Pg. 5).
After reviewing the work of David Hume, the idea of a God existing in a world filled with so much pain and suffering is not so hard to understand. Humes’ work highlights some interesting points which allowed me to reach the conclusion that suffering is perhaps a part of God’s divine plan for humans. Our morals and values allow us to operate and live our daily lives in conjunction with a set of standards that help us to better understand our world around us and essentially allows us to better prepare for the potential life after life. For each and every day we get closer to our impending deaths and possibly closer to meeting the grand orchestrator of our universe.
Thinkers and philosophers have been pondering misery since the dawn of civilization. At the dawn of humanity, humans existed to survive and reproduce; every day was a struggle. However, with the advent of civilization, humanity has moved further and further away from its original evolutionary drives, and it can be argued by secular thinkers that humans exist now to find happiness. Therefore, misery can be seen as the biggest obstacle to human happiness, yet misery itself is a mystery to many. Karl Marx’s The Communist Manifesto and Sigmund Freud’s Civilization and its Discontents put forth the authors’ opinions on the origins of mortal misery, and suggest methods to solve the problem of misery. Although the two have differing views, both see
Happiness plays an important and necessary role in the lives of people around the world. In America, happiness has been engrained in our national consciousness since Thomas Jefferson penned these famous words in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Jefferson). Since then, Americans have been engaged in that act: pursuing happiness. The problem however, as Ray Bradbury demonstrates in his novel Fahrenheit 451, is that those things which make us happy initially may eventually lead to our downfall. By examining Guy Montag, the protagonist in Fahrenheit 451, and the world he lives in we can gain valuable insights to direct us in our own pursuit of happiness. From Montag and other characters we will learn how physical, emotional, and spiritual happiness can drastically affect our lives. We must ask ourselves what our lives, words, and actions are worth. We should hope that our words are not meaningless, “as wind in dried grass” (Eliot).
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
Two great men, two exact opposite points of view, when it comes to the question of a master creator. These two men would have a profound effect on the life that we live today. Freud who was born to an orthodox Jewish family in the mid 1800’s was born into a lower class family his father was in the wool trade. The collapse of the family business moved him and his family to a Vienna, Ghetto. Freud would later become the voice of science in a logical and philosophical battle. The latter would be author, C.S Lewis; Lewis grew up in a religious home as well, being born 42 years after the birth of Freud. Lewis’s parents were both educated individuals. Lewis’s father was a lawyer and his mother a mathematician. These men would both face their own unique challenges and tribulations. One man would embrace the idea of atheism and the other would unwillingly submit to theism.
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...
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.
Freud voices his opinion when he says, Freud 717). Freud challenges the existence of religion and says it is an illusion because he is more inclined to believing in scientific reason. Religion is more subjective whereas, science is more objective. That is why Freud says that religion appeals to our wish fulfillment. He says that illusions aren’t false when he uses the example of a middle-class girl having an illusion of a prince marrying her and he points out the fact that it is possible but unlikely. Freud is trying to say that the heavenly father is nothing but an illusion. To Freud religion is an “invented illusion” and science is insusceptible to illusion. Therefore, we are presented with an “expression of faith –or, rather, unfaith” when presented with the idea of “religious illusion”. There is a point where Borges reveals to readers that, (Borges 71-72). The lottery of Babylon is known to be a society that functions in secret and is absolute in authority. The Company is a figure of chance but chance is an inexorable component of life and that is why the idea of the company might seem too complex for the people of Babylon to comprehend. The lottery is an arbitrary system that has no providential logic which ties it to a kind of anti-fate. Freud presents to his readers the possibility of religion being and illusion and similarly Borges does the
According to Freud’s conclusion based on decades of experimentation and theoretical work in the field of psychotherapy, humans cannot be happy because a satisfaction of needs creates only a momentary phase of happiness which expires after some time. Therefore, the focus of life should not be obtaining happiness, and people should focus on avoiding suffering instead (Bullock, n.d.). However, several paradigms about well-being exist, and individual cognitive patterns and paradigms define the emotional responses to social influences. From an objective viewpoint, well-being is a state of consciousness that arises from a combination of internal and external factors, and money is an unstable external influence in defining subjective well-being.
Goodwin, A. (1998). Freud and Erikson: Their Contributions to the Psychology of God-Image Formation. Pastoral Psychology, 47(2), 97-117. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Suppose one was to record their pleasures down on paper using a graph. At first, one might be confused as to how to go about quantifying their happiness. After consideration of the quality of ones varying pleasures though, one is more able to deduce whether it is a higher or a lower pleasure and graph them. This enables one to distinguish which things promote the greatest pleasure, which translates itself to strive for happiness. For example, consider the attainment of food or sex in contrast to mental and spiritual growth. When one is only interested in satiating their appetite for food or sex, the pleasure acquired is minuscule when compared to the acquisition of mental and spiritual growth. Thus, attaining mental and spiritual growth will bring o...
When we are young children, we are introduced to the concept of "living happily ever after". This is a fairy-tale emotional state of absolute happiness, where nothing really happens, and nothing even seems to matter. It is a state of feeling good all the time. In fairy tales, this feeling is usually found in fulfilling marriages, royal castles, singing birds and laughing children. In real life, an even-keeled mood is more psychologically healthy than a mood in which you frequently achieve great heights of happiness. Furthermore, when you ask people what makes their lives worth living, they rarely mention their mood. They are more likely to talk about what they find meaningful, such as their work or relationships. Research suggests that if you focus too much on trying to feel good all the time, you’ll actually undermine your ability to ever feel good because no amount of feeling good will be satisfying to you. If feeling good all the time were the only requirement for happiness, then a person who uses cocaine every day would be extremely happy. In our endless struggle for more money, more love and more security, we have forgotten the most fundamental fact: happiness is not caused by possessions or social positions, and can in fact be experienced in any daily activity. We have made happiness a utopia: expensive, complicated, and unreachable.