During WWI, Sigmund Freud was able to stew over his theories,
some early criticisms, but he also took stock of the Great War that interrupted everyone's lives.
The life that people once new, in what was called the British Peace,
the long peace that lasted 100 years, was over.
Lives were uprooted, but there was also a lot of optimism on each side. There was a sense of adventure,
until one faced reality and saw what
adventure really was like.
Freud, like many European citizens, were quickly disillusioned with the Great War.
The lens of superiority that Europeans viewed themselves with was altered.
In the European experiment, the idea of civilization allowed people of
different cultures to intermix with a common set of standards of conduct to make things run smoothly.
The advantage, that we take for granted, was a
diversity of choices to explore, and modes of living one's life.
This freedom allowed one to compare and criticize modes of living from one's own culture
and upbringing by allowing access to new role models. A...
Even with the odd war that did brake out, due to traditional differences, there was
still an expectation of showing deference to non-combatants and the injured.
The paradox of technological advancement, also meant advancement in the ability to dispatch enemies.
Freud then gave a great example of Splitting, in which people can be treated as all or nothing.
When there is conflict it is very easy for one to look at
the reason for the conflict and zoom in on it to such an extent that...
Not only is the enemy made so extremely Other,
the same distortions of perception can apply to how we ignore our own problems.
The stark contrast between good and evil in our minds has to be viewed with suspicion.
Freud then shows how far the self-serving excuses go. It goes all the way to the top. Even today in modern politics,
the endless Splitting and sense of Otherness dominates the news where
each participant relishes the pleasure to twist any scrap of information
for bashing their political foes. The amnesiacs decry the lack of decorum in politics
as if it was the newest complaint to be brought up. It was always there.
Typical leadership in all human groups highlight the problems of the "enemy" and hide their own problems.
Freud then smacks squarely into the problem of evil. What is it and how does it form? Is it inherited?
Here disappointingly all he has to say is...
Not entirely moving on from the subject of evil, Freud then changes the subject to that of human development,
like he did for most of his career. Civilization aims at...
For Freud, this doesn't get at the source of evil but instead adds a layer of confusion.
The result of such socially-unacceptable impulses
are forced ego postures to appear the opposite of what one feels,
and the natural hypocrisy when unconscious forces rebel.
Matching Carl Jung's opinions of the human personality, Freud concurs that,
How a person transforms from bad to good in Freud's understanding is a
volitional choice that one makes because one can gain a better result.
An authentic change because one wants to change. An early theoretical form of intrinsic motivation.
The opposite influence is extrinsic motivation.
He also brings up a tantalizing theoretical life path that
could go in a healthy direction or an unhealthy one. The more we can transform
our authentic desires by aiming them at socially accepted goals, the more we can
join in with society and feel authentic pleasure ourselves. The healthy path is
finding a partner we actually like, finding jobs we like, and transmitting
biological tendencies to our children and teaching the next generation how to
develop motivated endeavour. The unhealthy path is to do everything by force
without finding any activity enjoyable. The unconscious constantly rebels.
Freud throughout his works focused more on the variable side of
human character and how goals and objects of desire could change.
his could harmonize with others or lead to conflict. Like Nietzsche, Freud looks at
our impulses as considered good or bad depending on the culture evaluating.
As long as you behave, the wider culture doesn't care what is lurking in your unconscious.
The problem with this is when many individuals falter in being able to gratify their desires to satisfaction.
The sense of rebellion can spill over into conflict.
The Great War for Freud was a reminder of this hypocrisy.
The problem of childhood development is that it can easily revert back to older forms, and newer forms of development rest on shaky ground.
Disease for Freud is regression, and "impacts of life," such as war, can accelerate regression.
What I gather from Freud's analysis is the all important response to society
from the individual has to avoid excessively false reaction formations.
Social pressures to force people into cooperation require constant individual adjustments.
With each new social impediment to an individual goal,
an individual can feel alienated and lost, but as with so many of my prior reviews have pointed out,
the message is to develop stronger concentration towards a
new goal that is individually chosen so that the individual response is authentic,
while being flexible enough to change objects when society changes.
So many personality problems, especially narcissism, are failures to achieve this.
Constantly looking for attention in inauthentic ways to force appreciation
from others can never really replace a loving intimate relationship, a job you have mastered,
and the beautiful wonder of existence. Instead of being an actor on the stage,
life must be real and engaging. If this balance happens then
the need for constant wars disappears.
How some of these psychological diseases can manifest in culture, in a way that we can witness,
is how our aims to improve the world can go awry. Freud has probably
the best description of unconscious motives that I've ever read.
You can apply his understanding to any professional, including psychologists,
any self-help motivations, and of course any form of political, environmental
and economic "solutions" that all too often cause unforeseen damage. One can feel
that one is a hero but one can easily appear as a villain to others when
unconscious desires, goals and intentions clash. All heroes who solve social problems
have the problem of unconscious self-interest.
This is also how Freud views the collective passions of the nations mobilized for war.
For Freud, it is only the awareness of this problem and our social constructions
that respond to this understanding, that will advance civilization further.
One of the ways to do this is hinted with Freud's
understanding of how people can be good in certain situations and bad in others.
To find places for people who are good at different things and are able to
trade those specialties with each other, so as to offset individual weaknesses,
creates another possible answer to the problem of class warfare and resentment.
A bigger variety of places for people, where they can feel special, allows for more peace.
The goal changes from social climbing to feel happy to intrinsic motivation.
The other casualty of the Great War for Freud was innocence towards death which...
He feels that our grieving process is evidence of how...
The unconscious is surprised by death, so much so that...
Death ultimately ends up being more about the survivors.
Survivors move into avoidance behaviour such as...
...and look for...
Ironically, after Freud's heavy criticism of the war, he managed to find a positive angle
revealing that desperate libido trying to find something exciting to latch onto,
even if it's evil or destructive. Facing death in a real way
adds a kind of zest for Freud because the stakes are higher.
The fright and contemplation of one's own death gains a reality that the emotions require in order to activate.
Here we get to the classic opposing views of how to view our own death.
There's an argument for religion vs. atheism.
For an atheist, the fact that weapons can transform the human body into small fragments,
not much different from the dirt pellets displaced by mortar shells,
it's a clear sign of finality. A terrible nothingness and futility.
For a religious person, they can ask, "why are there dirt pellets, or anything at all for that matter?"
Either way, the other side is an "undiscovered country" as Shakespeare put so well.
The anxiety of obliteration is interrupted
by the habits of training when the trench whistle is sounded.
