Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
WW Norton & Co (1975), Edition: 1st Am. ed., Paperback, 66 pages
Description
In the manner of the eighteenth-century philosophe, Freud argued that religion and science were mortal enemies. Early in the century, he began to think about religion psychoanalytically and to discuss it in his writings. The Future of an Illusion (1927), Freud's best known and most emphatic psychoanalytic exploration of religion, is the culmination of a lifelong pattern of thinking.
User reviews
LibraryThing member paradoxosalpha
In The Future of an Illusion, Freud suggests as a germinal postulate of religion, “Life in this world … signifies a perfecting of man’s nature. It is probably the spiritual part of man, the soul …” (23). The Greek for soul is psyche. Psychoanalysis, which set itself the task of diagnosing
The “care of souls” is the pastoral function in Christian religion, and equally a mission of psychoanalysis as a therapeutic institution, with its priestly class of analysts. Freud does not hold himself back from the pleasures of religiously-based rhetoric. For example, he writes that “the questions which religious doctrine finds it so easy to answer” ... “might be called too sacred” to be addressed in a traditional, unquestioning manner (40). Taking a cue from the Dutch anti-colonialist Multatuli, Freud makes reference to “our God, Logos” slowly fulfilling the desires of mankind (69). And he sometimes shows a rather “religious” tendency (as he would perhaps describe it) to pick and choose among scientific theories for the sake of doctrinal coherence in psychoanalysis.
In one of his devil’s advocate passages in The Future of an Illusion, Freud remarks, “If you want to expel religion from our European civilization, you can only do it by means of another system of doctrines,” which would itself engender a functional religion, with all of the concomitant drawbacks (65-6). In replying to his own objection, Freud emphasizes the desired differences in his post-religious system: it is to be non-delusive and more capable of being corrected. It will be science, not religion. But Freudian psychoanalysis, for all of its scientific trappings, is already at some remove from the positivist territory of the physical sciences. It is no closer to, say, biology, than the monotheism of Moses was to the polytheistic religion of eastern Mediterranean antiquity. In effect, Freud’s proposal is that the superstitious religion of traditions focused on God should be replaced in the future with a scientific religion trained on the soul.
Show More
and treating the psyche (and not merely the conscious mind, nor the organic brain as such), seems to be a phenomenon in some measure tailor-made to supplement, supplant, or substitute for religion. Freud presented a clear claim that religion is a mass neurosis, not only in The Future of an Illusion, but also in his later work Moses and Monotheism. To the extent that one sees the collective problem of religious ‘delusion’ as analogous to obsessional neurosis in the individual, one might take psychoanalysis, the custodian of techniques to address the latter, as a point of departure to cope with the former. And while he does not make light of the difficulty in coming to do without traditional religions, Freud insists on the desirability and even “fatal inevitability” of such “growth” in the human condition (55).The “care of souls” is the pastoral function in Christian religion, and equally a mission of psychoanalysis as a therapeutic institution, with its priestly class of analysts. Freud does not hold himself back from the pleasures of religiously-based rhetoric. For example, he writes that “the questions which religious doctrine finds it so easy to answer” ... “might be called too sacred” to be addressed in a traditional, unquestioning manner (40). Taking a cue from the Dutch anti-colonialist Multatuli, Freud makes reference to “our God, Logos” slowly fulfilling the desires of mankind (69). And he sometimes shows a rather “religious” tendency (as he would perhaps describe it) to pick and choose among scientific theories for the sake of doctrinal coherence in psychoanalysis.
In one of his devil’s advocate passages in The Future of an Illusion, Freud remarks, “If you want to expel religion from our European civilization, you can only do it by means of another system of doctrines,” which would itself engender a functional religion, with all of the concomitant drawbacks (65-6). In replying to his own objection, Freud emphasizes the desired differences in his post-religious system: it is to be non-delusive and more capable of being corrected. It will be science, not religion. But Freudian psychoanalysis, for all of its scientific trappings, is already at some remove from the positivist territory of the physical sciences. It is no closer to, say, biology, than the monotheism of Moses was to the polytheistic religion of eastern Mediterranean antiquity. In effect, Freud’s proposal is that the superstitious religion of traditions focused on God should be replaced in the future with a scientific religion trained on the soul.
Show Less
LibraryThing member atomheart
interesting perspective on the illusion of religion from the king and creator of psycho-analysis. this is an extremely short read, and one that i will have to re-read again to get a firmer understanding of his analysis.
his scientific tactic of breaking down the creation and dissemination of
moreover, he discusses the formation of religion from both the achievement and shortcomings of civilization. and answers how the world would handle the non-existence of it, as a civilization.
its nice to read a purely scientific analysis of religion. not opinion, but analysis using the same method he used to make modern psychology what it is today.
but i guess this is a moot point when we as humans are not capable of understanding divine power and wisdom.
his scientific tactic of breaking down the creation and dissemination of
Show More
religious ideas over centuries, using psycho-analysis, is quite fascinating and frankly, hard to rationally argue. it really only leaves ones' 'faith' to believe in the absurdities of religious doctrine, or as he puts it, '[the church] maintains that religious doctrines are outside the jurisdiction of reason - are above reason. Their truth must be felt inwardly, and they need not be comprehended.' which begs the next statement that i thoroughly enjoy because it creates a nasty, yet accurate slippery slope, 'Am I to be obliged to believe in every absurdity? And if not, why this one in particular?'moreover, he discusses the formation of religion from both the achievement and shortcomings of civilization. and answers how the world would handle the non-existence of it, as a civilization.
its nice to read a purely scientific analysis of religion. not opinion, but analysis using the same method he used to make modern psychology what it is today.
but i guess this is a moot point when we as humans are not capable of understanding divine power and wisdom.
Show Less
LibraryThing member vsmoothe
Yawn. Freud bores me. He doesn't like religion. Woo-hoo for him.
LibraryThing member HadriantheBlind
Freud, in most modern opinions, oscillates wildly between being beautifully right and spectacularly wrong. This book contains some of his most piercing insights and acerbic wit.
Freud analyzes the old dinosaur of religion as he saw it, finding it to serve as a type of cure for a childlike
He also re-examines the role of religion in modern life, saying that it is very appealing to those who are most downtrodden in society - again, a statement that history has gratified. However, Freud also says that having a society totally reliant on atheism would also be a fault, too.
A profoundly interesting book, and one of the great ideas in history is here - one with which many still grapple.
Freud analyzes the old dinosaur of religion as he saw it, finding it to serve as a type of cure for a childlike
Show More
helplessness in the world. He delves briefly into his idea of a 'father complex', but this idea is well applied here - modern theorists have built off of his ideas here to an astonishing degree.He also re-examines the role of religion in modern life, saying that it is very appealing to those who are most downtrodden in society - again, a statement that history has gratified. However, Freud also says that having a society totally reliant on atheism would also be a fault, too.
A profoundly interesting book, and one of the great ideas in history is here - one with which many still grapple.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jonfaith
But surely infantilism is destined to be surmounted. Men cannot remain children for ever; they must in the end go out into 'hostile life'. We may call this 'education to reality. Need I confess to you that the whole purpose of my book is to point out the necessity for this forward step?
This isn't
This isn't
Show More
exactly theory, but more a prose poem or maybe agitprop. Freud deftly employs a dialogue method aiming for some persuasive measure, though accepting that his words aren't likely to influence the unwilling. He does paraphrase his opponents well. While remaining a plea, the text is an eloquent one. His style is adroit and drenched in wit (see Freud's thoughts on Prohibition). There is much to be said about a sociology of the murderous: denizens who would overthrow the yoke of civilization at the first opportunity. Here's to austerity measures and prayer in schools. Show Less
LibraryThing member shannonkearns
i find freud to be pretty insufferable and full of himself. even if he has good points i am so annoyed by his writing style that i can't get to them.
LibraryThing member sgarnell
Freud brings up a number of interesting arguments. Perhaps not everyone will agree, but I think this book has an interesting take on the mechanics of religious faith, and offers one possible explanation for its manifestation.
LibraryThing member tabascofromgudreads
Perhaps relevant in his times, but utter BS today. Our life is, essentially, a dream. If you are pessimistic enough to call any religion a collective illusion or neurosis, then you should have the courage and intellectual honesty to call your entire life, religious or non religious, an illusion and
One more intellectual to load on the "Ooops, I missed the point" wagon. On to the next one! Oh, nice to meet you, prof. Dawkins...
Show More
a neurosis. One more intellectual to load on the "Ooops, I missed the point" wagon. On to the next one! Oh, nice to meet you, prof. Dawkins...
Show Less
LibraryThing member tabascofromgudreads
Perhaps relevant in his times, but utter BS today. Our life is, essentially, a dream. If you are pessimistic enough to call any religion a collective illusion or neurosis, then you should have the courage and intellectual honesty to call your entire life, religious or non religious, an illusion and
One more intellectual to load on the "Ooops, I missed the point" wagon. On to the next one! Oh, nice to meet you, prof. Dawkins...
Show More
a neurosis. One more intellectual to load on the "Ooops, I missed the point" wagon. On to the next one! Oh, nice to meet you, prof. Dawkins...
Show Less
Language
Original publication date
1927
ISBN
0393011208 / 9780393011203