Psychoanalysis Unmasks Blind Belief
And the Emotional Basis of Ignorance
Carlos Cardoso Aveline

Freud (1856-1939) in his
office
Sigmund
Freud wrote about the wrong methods by which people try to avoid suffering and obtain
happiness.
As
soon as one’s dreams start getting destroyed by reality, there emerges a
variety of possible ways to escape from the conscious perception of pain.
Spiritual
delusions are one possibility. The intensive use of television and
drug-addiction are two other choices. Political and religious ideologies also offer
many self-delusional possibilities.
The
common ground to all escapes from reality is that they postpone the unavoidable
task of combining a process of self-knowledge and self-transformation with altruistic
practices, and a feeling of unconditional respect for all beings.
Speaking
of one’s disillusionment with the world, Freud explains:
“The
hermit turns his back on this world; he will have nothing to do with it. But
one can do more than that; one can try to re-create it, try to build up another
instead, from which the most unbearable features are eliminated and replaced by
others corresponding to one’s own wishes.”
The
founder of Psychoanalysis proceeds:
“He
who in his despair and defiance sets out on this path will not as a rule get
very far; reality will be too strong for him. He becomes a madman and usually
finds no one to help him in carrying through his delusion. It is said, however,
that each one of us behaves in some respect like the paranoiac, substituting a
wish-fulfilment for some aspect of the world which is unbearable to him, and
carrying this delusion through into reality.”
What
if people’s unrealistic dreams about reality are shared by others?
“When
a large number of people make this attempt together and try to obtain assurance
of happiness and protection from suffering by a delusional transformation of
reality, it acquires special significance. The religions of humanity, too, must
be classified as mass-delusions of this kind. Needless to say, no one who
shares a delusion recognizes it as such.” [1]
Conventional
religions usually ignore the presence of a common truth in the different mystical
traditions, and deny the existence of a universal wisdom that transcends sectarian
forms of religiosity.
Though
using different words and concepts, both Psychoanalysis and the original
teachings of modern Theosophy make an effective unmasking of the superficial
and authoritarian character of most conventional creeds.
Russian
philosopher Nicolas Berdyaev (1874-1948) helps in the same task.
“Ethics
has not paid sufficient attention to the monstrously big part played by
falsehood in man’s moral and spiritual life”, he says. “What is meant here is
not the falsehood which is regarded as an expression of wickedness, but
falsehood which is morally sanctioned as good. People do not believe that the
good may be preserved and established without the aid of falsehood. The good is the end, the lies are the means. (…)
The religious life of mankind, and perhaps of Christendom in particular, is
permeated with falsity.”
And Berdyaev
goes on:
“There
is a kind of falsity which is considered a moral and religious duty, and those
who reject it are said to be rebels. There exist social accumulations of
falsity which have become part of the established order of things. This is connected with the essential
character of moral perception and judgment - with the absence of what I call
first-hand moral acts. Conventional, as
it were, socially organized falsity clusters round all social groupings, such
as the family, the class, the party, the church, the nation, the state. Such
conventional falsity is a means of self-preservation for these institutions;
truth might lead to their break up. The conventional falsity of socially
organized groups (I include among them schools of thought and ideological
tendencies) deprives man of the freedom of moral perception and moral judgment.”
[2]
The
attitude is widely adopted in various degrees in politics and every aspect of
social life. In order to show the
ridiculous violence implicit in the conventional idea of good manners, Freud
quoted these ironical words by Heine:
“Mine
is the most peaceable disposition. My wishes are a humble dwelling with a thatched
roof, but a good bed, good food, milk and butter of the freshest, flowers at my
windows, some fine tall trees before my door; and if the good God wants to make
me completely happy, he will grant me the joy of seeing some six or seven of my
enemies hanging from these trees. With my heart full of deep emotion I shall
forgive them before they die all the wrong they did me in their lifetime -
true, one must forgive one’s enemies, but not until they are brought to
execution.” [3]
When
during the 19th century the influence of materialism expanded in our
civilization, Marxism became popular as a philosophy. Left-wing thinkers
dreamed that human beings don’t need to purify themselves, learn some wisdom
and ethics or undergo an inner transformation. They thought it was enough to
“change the world” and above all “change the others”, for “when everyone thinks like us, humanity will be happy at last”.
More
than one church and sect tends to nurture similar thoughts.
Well-intentioned
social-liberals and left-wing citizens often think of themselves as true angels
of peace. Their views have one or two fundamental points in common with classic
Marxism, in that they see no need for human beings to improve themselves. The
psychological diseases of selfishness, envy, hatred and aggression deserve no
attention. Economic capitalism is the sole problem: all that people need in
order to be eternally happy is a change in economy.
Speaking
of the left and its approach to the problem of hatred and violence, Freud says:
“The
Communists believe they have found a way of delivering us from this evil. Man
is whole-heartedly good and friendly to his neighbour, they say, but the system
of private property has corrupted his nature. The possession of private
property gives power to the individual and thence the temptation arises to
ill-treat his neighbour; the man who is excluded from the possession of
property is obliged to rebel in hostility against the oppressor. If private property
were abolished, all valuables held in common and all allowed to share in the
enjoyment of them, ill-will and enmity would disappear from among men. Since
all needs would be satisfied, none would have any reason to regard another as
an enemy; all would willingly undertake the work which is necessary.”
Every
human being is therefore essentially an angel according to Marxism.
No
need of self-reform: it is enough to eliminate the system of private property
of means of production for humanity to attain the celestial heights. Western social-liberals
of course reject communism. They sincerely rephrase the same idea in more
modest ways, and say that all we need is
better salaries everywhere.
However,
Freud continues:
“I
have no concern with any economic criticisms of the communistic system; I
cannot enquire into whether the abolition of private property is advantageous
and expedient. But I am able to recognize that psychologically it is founded on
an untenable illusion. By abolishing private property one deprives the human
love of aggression of one of its instruments, a strong one undoubtedly, but
assuredly not the strongest. It in no way alters the individual differences in
power and influence which are turned by aggressiveness to its own use, nor does
it change the nature of the instinct in any way. This instinct did not arise as
the result of property; it reigned almost supreme in primitive times when
possessions were still extremely scanty; it shows itself already in the nursery
when possessions have hardly grown out of their original anal shape; it is at
the bottom of all the relations of affection and love between human beings -
possibly with the single exception of that of a mother to her male child.
Suppose that personal rights to material goods are done away with, there still
remain prerogatives in sexual relationships, which must arouse the strongest
rancour and most violent enmity among men and women who are otherwise equal.
Let us suppose this were also to be removed by instituting complete liberty in
sexual life so that the family, the germ-cell of culture, ceased to exist; one
could not, it is true, foresee the new paths on which cultural development
might then proceed, but one thing one would be bound to expect and that is that
the ineffaceable feature of human nature would follow wherever it led.” [4]
It
is easy to see in our century that indulgence in personal habits and the
destruction or fragility of family do not pave the way to heaven and to harmony
in social relations.
Yet
in self-indulgence and similar matters the political Left is far from being the
sole responsible for human mistakes and social decay. Politically conservative
thinking suffers from its own varieties of delusion. One of them is money-worship,
a religion whose priests are bankers, and which has many a politician as its
employee.
A
significant right-wing delusion is in
the idea that poor people and millions of honest workers can be treated with disrespect,
paid low salaries or kept in unemployment while the financial elite behaves in
irresponsible ways. Self-indulgence in financial crimes, big and small, and deliberate
falsehood in political life are familiar to both “liberals” and “conservatives”
around the world.
Of
course millions of decent citizens support a variety of political parties around
the world, and religious organizations of all kinds.
Still
the way to heaven is not in joining
narrow-minded religious sects, or attempting to make the reform of the world
through conventional politics, war, or social movements.
The
path to celestial heights is within.
The
temple is invisible. It exists in one’s soul. Living in harmony with the sky begins
with understanding the neurotic mechanisms of mutual hatred and ignorance.
It
is worse than useless to project onto others the responsibility for our own
psychic suffering, or the duty of making us happy. A firm sense of self-reliance
and the decision to keep free from the habit of blaming others are two helpful
factors along the way to heaven.
Freud
says that “it is always possible to unite considerable numbers of men in love
towards one another, so long as there are still some [men] remaining as objects
for aggressive manifestations”.
In
other words, humans are fond of using other humans as scapegoats, and such
negative feelings are often mutual. In the Middle East and around the world, however,
this sort of neurotic competition does not have to take place through murder,
war or terror.
Once
anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism, Islamic terror and similar hatred-based ideologies
are defeated, hopefully once and for all, there are more convenient forms of
satisfaction for human aggressive tendencies.
Sports
is but one of them.
Freud
once interested himself “in the peculiar fact that peoples whose territories
are adjacent, and are otherwise closely related, are always at feud with and
ridiculing each other, as for instance, the Spaniards and the Portuguese, the
North and South Germans, the English and the Scotch, and so on.”[5]
The
Psychoanalyst then added that this is a comparatively harmless way to deal with
the problem of collective aggressiveness.
Freud
was right, and perhaps he was prophetic. In a future that one probably ought to
keep unspecified, moderate jokes and respectful ridicule hopefully will turn
out to be the densest forms of conflict among human individuals and social
groups. Laughing at our own mistakes is
also a healthy thing to do, and perhaps more useful than laughing at our
neighbours.
NOTES:
[1] “Civilization
and Its Discontents”, by Sigmund Freud, part II. See “The Major Works of Sigmund
Freud”, Great Books of the Western World, Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc., 884
pp., 1952, p. 774.
[2] “The Destiny of
Man”, Nicolas Berdyaev, Harper Torchbooks, Harper & Brothers, New York,
1960, 310 pp., see pp. 160-161. The book is available in our associated
websites.
[3] “Civilization
and Its Discontents”, by Sigmund Freud, part III. See “The Major Works of
Sigmund Freud”, Great Books of the Western World, p. 786.
[4] “Civilization
and Its Discontents”, by Sigmund Freud, part III. See “The Major Works of
Sigmund Freud”, Great Books of the Western World, pp. 787-788.
[5] “Civilization
and Its Discontents”, by Sigmund Freud, part III. See “The Major Works of
Sigmund Freud”, p. 788.
000
The above text was
first published on 10 April 2017 in our blog at “The Times of Israel”.
000
Read also in our
associated websites the article “A
Psychoanalysis of Religions”.
000
In September 2016, after a careful
analysis of the state of the esoteric movement worldwide, a group of students decided
to form the Independent Lodge of
Theosophists. Two of the priorities
adopted by the ILT are taking lessons from History and building a
better future.
000