Future of an Illusion by Sigmund Freud Essay

Throughout the rest of the book, Freud addresses the conflict between civilization and the individual. He starts with the fundamental paradox of civilization: we created civilization as a tool to protect ourselves from unhappiness; however it is our largest source of unhappiness. He also points out that contemporary technological advances have been a mixed blessing for human happiness. He also asks what the purpose of civilization is if it is not to satisfy the pleasure principal. He later concedes that civilization has to make compromises of happiness to fulfill its primary goal of bringing people into peaceful relationships with each other, by making them subject to a higher, communal authority.

from wrong even if they did not believe in a God. According to Freud, humans belonged

In chapter 8, Freud analyses the relationship between civilization and individual further. In his view, personal fulfillment still can be achieved under the community culture. He explains, “ Here by far the most important thing is the aim of creating a unity out of the individual human beings. It is true that the aim of happiness is still there, but it is pushed into the background”(Freud 105). In other words, community formed with every single individual and forming a community is the most important objective in the process of society development. Personal satisfaction can be achieved maximize if it is assumed that personal development is independent. However, the fact is not that simple. Individuals were born in community and they grow up in the environment that surrounded by their families and friends. They developed themselves along with the improvement of community. Individual and society are inseparable. So when individual considers about achieving personal fulfillment, the community culture is the first and the most primary restriction because they live in the community and they must obey community rules first. That is why Freud writes that personal happiness is always people pursuing but it is pushed into background when it intersects with community culture. For this reason, individual

Philosophers Sigmund Freud and Eric Hobsbawm present two explanations of the origins of civilization in their books Civilization and its Discontent and Nations and Nationalism since 1780, respectively. In doing so, each philosopher establish a distinct, and somewhat similar, definition of civilization. According to Freud, “’civilization’ describes the whole sum of the achievements and the regulations which distinguish our lives from those of our animal ancestors.” (Freud, 63) There are distinct features of a civilization, such as beauty, the “encouragement of man’s higher mental activities – his intellectual, scientific and artistic achievements” (Freud, 69) and the social relations between men. While Freud refers to this union of a group

Religion is common around the world on every continent, in every country, in all kinds of different people. Despite their differences, they all provide something that the group of people needs. But is there some truth in what some may call lies? In Cat’s Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut, religion works for the people of San Lorenzo, giving them comfort in the worst of conditions. While religion may just be made up lies, it is more beneficial than science, which cannot give people what they need.

Religion provides hope for those who are hopeless. It aims to welcome those who are alienated and feel that their life has no purpose. Religion served the same function in the Middle Ages and Renaissance as it does today. However, religion was embraced more during the Middle Ages by desperate

Freud mainly focuses on human nature and questions the desire, ideas ,and beliefs that shape a human, he then further analyses them. We see in his literature, Civilization and its Disconnect, that he questions religion and the belief in God. He himself does not believe in God, but wants to know why many people follow and trust something that they cannot see. He also questions the concept of human relationships. Knowing that a two person relationship and interaction is inevitable and that it is a part of life, but he does not know if a third relationship, and further on, is necessary. Regardless, human relationships are a part of society, and one of causes of civilizations, which Freud defines as “the whole some of achievement and the regulations which distinguish our lives” (Freud). With one of the achievements

The Bible is a sacred text that has guided men and women in life to stay on this path of goodness and selflessness. According to Freud the Bible may be the cause of civilization’s unhappiness. Mankind’s freedom has been stifled because of the restrain society has put on our “primal nature”. Anything that goes against the structure the Bible has made in society has been repelled and ignored because it is no longer something that can be thought of as real or taken seriously. Freud believes that the happiness we cannot attain is due to the freedoms we lack. This belief of lacking in freedom is not correct based on the Bible’s chapters. Mans inability to be happy or remain happy is due to his or her need of having something to prove. This

Consequently, it is apparent that though Freud is in no way campaigning for religion, the very

Religion emerges from the human susceptibility for protection and use it as a tool for liberation from the bitter realities and perplexities of the world. “Religious ideas are teachings and pronouncements about facts and states of external (or internal) reality that convey something one has not discovered for oneself and which assert the right to be believed” (Freud 88). We must object to religious claims because there is no proof to substantiate them and merely ideas we follow for generations. Religious ideas are beyond the control of reasoning, as if we don’t validate our beliefs and behave that our beliefs have a substantial basis of support. Religious ideas are teachings, not the thought that

Freud examined much of psychoanalysis and trends that were affected by it. Freud disagreed with religion to full extent. He believed that there needed to different tasks accomplished by the individuals that made up the society but in difference will lead to capitalism and the destruction of the social structure.

Freud referred to the Hobbes argument that humans are naturally hostile to one another, humans depend on their own man made devices and hostile nature, leading humanity into a war where a man will be against each other (Hobbes 1906, 96). Human civilization is an effort to set up limitations for man’s aggressive

In his book Civilization and Its Discontents, Sigmund Freud offers an explanation for why, as individuals, we tend to punish

Freud’s view of civilization emerges from his understanding of the struggle between Eros and Death. Freud expresses the existence of two contrary instincts, Eros and Death, via starting from the speculations on the beginning of life and biological parallels. While Eros preserves the living substance and joins it into larger units, such as societies, Death dissolves these units and brings them back to their primeval state. The death drives appear to be regressive, striving for a return to a less differentiated, less organized state of tensionlessness. In contrast, Eros (which embraces sexual and life-preserving instincts) is progressive in seeking ever more differentiated forms of organized life and even the widening of differences in it

Although Freud argues that these religious values should not be accepted due to the absence of proof; people find interest in the information, connection to ones beliefs and answers to otherwise indefinable questions through religion. The three claims made to support religious foundation are: beliefs practiced and shared by ancestors, possession of proofs and it is socially forbidden to raise questions regarding evidence supporting religious ideas (p. 33). Freud is quick to rebut these claims with three reasons to be suspicious. He begins by denouncing the ancestors who passed down these religious doctrines as being too ignorant to trust. He then condemns the proofs as impossible to judge for any truth as a result of being “full of contradictions, revisions and falsifications” (p. 33). He finally stated that the third claim was the most suspicious of all, pronouncing that openly reproaching the question of authenticity was a clear declaration of society’s insecurity with the religious doctrines. Freud fails to understand how religion has the ability to assume such great influence over civilization without any unequivocal evidence supporting its ideas. His rebuttal successfully casts a sense of foolishness and absurdity on the inadequate and irrational claims. The claims themselves seem to be grasping for any semi-valid idea or at least an idea which proves difficult to question. Although society thinks they are showing respect and good