A Study of Freud and Jung on the Values of Religious Belief.

INTRODUCTION

In this essay I will look into the studies and the theories of Sigmund Freud and Carl Gustav Jung and their insight into religion. Sigmund Freud was born on May 6 1856 in Freiberg, Moravia, now in the Czech Republic. Freud developed the techniques of ''Psycho-Analysis'' for the treatment of psychological and emotional disorders. Which brings me to Carl Gustav Jung, whom Freud met in 1907 and the pair became close friends. Jung was a Swiss psychologist, who had different views on religion than Freud.

Freud’s View

THE DEVELOPMENT OF RELIGION

In relation to the value of religious belief, you have to look at the origins of humanity. The primitive world in which the early hominids lived in was a harsh one, uncivilised in the sense that they lived for all the basic things in life, primarily to reproduce. Primitive humans lived mainly in tribes and were much like animals, a pride of lions or a herd of buffalo for example. There was no real sense of individuality, they lived for the tribe. If a member were to die or be killed, they left to rot or be eaten by other animals. This was due to the limited consciousness of the primitive humans, they could not comprehend that the world did not revolve around themselves, in other words they were not really aware of other tribe member's consciousness.

The constant struggle of food and male dominance along with all the threats of nature, the life of a primitive human was extremely stressful. So, the primitive tribes concluded that the forces of nature and the unexpected could be appeased with rituals and ceremonies. Organised religion indicated that human thought had taken a large step toward consciousness, humans began to bury their dead and acknowledge the individual.

PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY OF RELIGION

So, with mankind's inability to cope with the external world and the instinctive forces within, religion was born out of helplessness. In The Future of an Illusion it says that ''Impersonal forces and destinies cannot be approached; they can remain eternally remote. But if the elements have passions that rage as they do in our own souls...If everywhere in nature there beings around us of a kind that we know in our society, then we can breathe freely and can feel at home in the uncanny and can deal by physical means with our own senseless anxiety'' (Freud 1927). So, Freud states that instead of coping with the external world using reason and logic we cope using our emotional forces whose function is to repress and perhaps control what we are unable to explain. This leads to what Freud has wrote about and calls an 'illusion' based on material from the earliest experiences of an individual. Freud goes on to place the Oedipus complex at the core of this development, he felt that social order, justice, morals and religion stemmed out of man's effort to deal with the Oedipus complex.

In further development of Freud's idea of man and man's creation of God, in relation to the value of religious belief, Freud puts the Oedipus complex at the core. Freud felt that civilisation had advanced because of man's inability to cope with the Oedipus complex (1923 p253/Rizzuto p15). The Oedipus complex is as follows, as a child the son wishes to possess the mother and take on the role of the father and become the provider and protector of the family unit. The boy is jealous of the relationship the father has with the mother, this is then followed by malicious feelings towards the father. However, during childhood, the boy felt protected by the father who was an authority figure and a source of knowledge. So, in gratitude and love, the son felt he could guarantee the love and protection of his father by obeying his wishes and not going against his fathers will.

The Formation of Religion

Freud drew most of his conclusion from various anthropological theories. Freud used these explain the origin of God's creation. The major events are as follows-

This is a preview of the whole essay

''Men originally lived in hordes, each under the domination of one single powerful, violent, jealous male'' (Freud 1925 p67 in Rizzuto p16). This is then followed by- ''One day all the brothers that had been driven out of the pack (by the dominant male) came together, killed and devoured their pack leader/father figure, and so made and end of the patriarchal horde'' (Freud 1913 p142 in Rizzuto p17). Freud carries on to say ''The totem meal...would thus become a commemoration of this memorable and criminal deed. This deed, which was the beginning of so many things- social organisation, moral restrictions and of course religion'' (1913 p142 in Rizzuto p17). Freud concluded that that the primal crime of mankind must have been patricide, the killing of the primal father of the primitive horde whose mnemic image was later transfigured into a deity (1913 p293 in Rizzuto p17).

For the first mnemic image to be an image of God, it had to undergo some changes. Firstly, it was repressed and then represented by the totem animal. The totem animal would be appeased and worshipped, not too dissimilar to how a child would to their father, ''So, the totems that were built by the primitive tribes, in fact became the first form of surrogate father'' (1913 p148 in Rizzuto p17). This is also in relation to what Freud said about object relations, ''gods and demons are creations of the human mind and are based on revivals of the young child's ideas of his father and mother''. The totem is a revived image of the paternal figure. The repressed image of god finally returned and was reshaped into a divine paternal image of God.

The Super Ego

The Super ego is the critical part of the psyche which represses the murderous and malicious feelings that the son has towards his father. Freud says that this is all part of the sexual development of the child. The son does however have love for his father and when the father is gone or is absent the repressed feelings that the boy has come out in other ways.

Freud provided several case studies which provide an incite into the effects of the Oedipus complex. One of these case studies concerned a man who had phobia of animals, in particular wolves. Freud traced back the phobia to a single incident in the childhood of this man where he witnessed his parents having sex. Freud concluded that the trauma of this incident resulted in a fear of animals and ultimately God. The Oedipus complex often transferred their fears to animals. Freud then referred back to the anthropological theories about the primitive tribes.

Freud saw that the love for the father grew even his absence, in his absence the love was transferred to the totem animal. The totem became the identity of the entire group, the father. In this group, once a year their would be a ritual killing and eating of the totem animal. This was the first stage of animism. ( Freud 1913 )

The second stage of development is into religion. As time passed the focus and worship of the totem animal became unsatisfactory. Longing for the father who would never come continued to grow. The reputation of the father grew to such a magnitude that the father acquired a divine significance and thus became a god. Freud states that the gods of religions are regarded with the same love and treatment as the original father figure.

One of Freud's favourite example's is the Christian ceremony, the Eucharist. The Christian god is treated with admiration and love, but each year is killed and eaten in this ceremony (the bread and wine which represent Christ's body and blood). This supports what Freud said about the animist ritual killing of the totem animal (Freud 1913)

Freud’s Conclusion on the Value of Religious Belief

Freud saw that there was value in religious belief. In The Future of an Illusion, Freud creates a conversation with an opponent and challenges them to their religious belief. The opponent raises two key points: Without religion there would be anarchy, people will have no supreme force to answer to, chaos will come again. The second point is a little less extreme, to deprive people of religion would be cruel as religion is their one consolation.

Freud replied that religion had done a great deal for civilisation, but we as a people overate it’s necessity. The illusion of religion does not benefit humanity the way we think. It doesn’t prevent people from rebelling against society. Instead, many believers abuse religion for their own selfish means to justify social immoralities. Freud also said that religion is used as a tool against the oppressed to keep them oppressed.

Freud’s alternative to religion would be a society based scientific and rational understanding. Freud felt that this will benefit humanity far more than religion. However, the removal of religion from society would be painful, but Freud argued that the end result would justify the means (Freud 1927)

Critique of Freud

Firstly Freud drew his conclusions based heavily on anthropological theories, this is easily discredited and has been one of the most attacked points of Freud’s work. Freud’s whole theory of the primal horde was based entirely on Darwin’s speculations. Now, it’s not accepted that people were grouped entirely in hordes, it is more likely that there was a greater variety of groups and individuals.

Freud’s concept of the totem objects and object relations is also attacked. Not all societies had totem object that they worshipped and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that the attitude toward the totem was one of love and ambivalence. The idea of the totem meal is heavily criticized by E.E. Evans-Pritchard, who doubts that this even happened and that the idea that guilt is handed down from generation to generation is equally discredited.

Secondly, the Oedipus complex also comes under criticism. Freud needed the Oedipus complex to be universal in order for it to be the cause of all religion and needed it to be caused by human nature for it lead into religion. Bronislaw Malinowski attacked both of these points in his book, Sex and Repression. First, the role of the father varies all other the world, his example being the Trobiand race where the role of the father is a weak nurse. In this race there is no evidence of the Oedipus complex, therefore the religion of this people must have originated elsewhere. Secondly, Malinowski looked at the animal world. He saw nothing in the of the animals nature that could cause the Oedipus complex. Malinowski concluded that the strict rules of religion are the cause of the complex.

The third criticism is in regard to Freud’s dependence on a small selection of evidence. His work was based heavily from a male point of view. Freud neglected to include religions based on female gods such as the Egyptian Isis Cult, or religions which do not have any fixed object of worship like Buddhism. Freud therefore can be criticized for basing his theories on religions that he is familiar too and ignoring others.

The final criticism is of Freud’s conclusion that religion should be overthrown, this conclusion drew a lot of hostility. Donald Winnicott argued that religion is essential to help humans adapt to their environment (Anne Jordan 1999)

Finally, Ana-Maria Rizzuto argued that religion is no more of an illusion than science. Both of them require a degree of interpretation. Freud’s assumption that science is the whole truth is unacceptable. Rizzuto has that Freud hasn’t so much removed religion from the equation but replaced it with an illusion (Ana-Maria Rizzuto 1981)

Jung’s View On Religion

Jung met Freud in 1907 and became close friends, the two spent a number of years working together, Jung was influenced by Freud's idea’s but eventually came to his own conclusions and rejected many parts of Freud’s conclusions about religion. Jung’s conclusions differed in several ways from Freud, however Jung did agree that religion was a psychological phenomenon.

Freud believed that religion is neurotic illness that is caused by sexual trauma, this is linked with Freud’s case studies regarding animism. Freud also saw religion as a dangerous force that needed to be overthrown. Jung objected to these points and made his own observations to replace Freud’s. To Jung, religion was not a threat or dangerous force, it was a natural occurrence in the human mind which came from the archetypes within. Religion on the whole, is a beneficial experience which harmonizes the mind and without it, the mind would then develop problems. ( Anne Jordan 1999 )

Background to Jung

Jung’s outlook on religion comes directly from his own knowledge and understanding of psychology, two features of his work are essential to know in order to fully understand him. Firstly, the concept of neuroses, Jung’s work with schizophrenia led him to reject Freud’s view that all neuroses were caused by sexual trauma and repressed sexuality. Jung came to this conclusion through the fact that schizophrenia had no apparent sexual connotations. So, Freud’s idea’s that neuroses were a result of sexual trauma cannot be relevant in this context (schizophrenia). Jung saw that the complete loss of self-awareness that schizophrenics suffer is a lot more serious than sexual disturbance. Jung was totally unconvinced by Freud’s view that the breast feeding of a baby was a sexual act. From observations such as this Jung concluded that religion is not dependent on sexual trauma.

Secondly, the libido was seen by Jung as the source, a constant flow of psychic energy, and if this flow was interrupted, the result of this would be neuroses. He also pointed out the libido, as the cause of neuroses that effect the whole personality and not just the sexual drive. Jung’s rejection of the sexual basis of the libido was to be the greatest disagreement between Freud and Jung.

Dreams

From Jung’s work, he saw that people dreaming or who were suffering from psychic disorders were often preoccupied with similar ideas and images. One particular patient, who was schizophrenic, Miss Miller had had dreams in which she her desire for God was compared to a moth’s desire for light. Jung noted that the light is usually parallel God, this is found in countless religious traditions. An example of this is the Aztec preoccupation with the Sun. To try and explain the similarities in mental images, Jung assumed a further part of the unconscious mind, into the personal unconscious and the collective unconscious.

Collective Unconscious

The collective unconscious is said to be the oldest part of the mind, within it holds the ‘’blueprints’’ for a whole range of ideas and images. According to Jung, the delusion of his patient Miss Miller in which light and God correlate are all came from the collective unconscious. Jung said that each one of us is born with the disposition to create similar kinds of primordial images, God being one of them.

Personal Unconscious

The personal unconscious contains all the forgotten memories and experiences of an individual. This is where Jung says the experiences of life are stored, they are drawn into the collective unconscious and form the delusions of deity. Jung gave this part of the psyche the technical name archetype.

Archetypes

Jung’s cardinal assertion was that God, Angels, Inner light and other religious phenomena, all were archetypal. Put simply, we are all born with the tendency to create religious images of God. This is to say that the images of God that we have, we have made from our own personal experiences in the world. Jung added that any images or thoughts that derive from archetypes can be regarded religious. The disposition to create these images is inherent.

Jung’s conclusion on the value of Religious Belief

Jung’s conclusion is not too different to Freud’s, there is no way to prove whether or not God exists. Jung said- ‘‘We simply do not know the ultimate derivation of the archetype anymore than we know the origin of the psyche. The competence of psychology as an empirical science only goes so far to establish, on the basis of comparative research, whether for instance the imprint found in the psyche can or cannot be termed a ‘God-Image’. Nothing positive or negative has thus been asserted about the possible existence of any God.’’(C.G. Jung Psychology and Alchemy, 1944). The only claim that can be satisfied is that God exists in a manner of speaking, God and the whole phenomena of religion exist as a psychic reality. For those who believe in God, who experience the archetypes, God is real. Although anything of God’s existence outside of the mind cannot be proved.

Ultimately Jung said that religion performs the role of keeping the balance of the mind, i.e. the libido. If the flow of psychic energy has been disrupted in some way, the resulting problem will be neurotic illness. Jung marked that the balance of the libido was critical to the mental health of a person, this was governed by an natural process that Jung called individuation. By this Jung meant that individuation results in a balanced personality, this is through the integration of the archetypes into the conscious personality.

According to Jung individuation is natural process with is regulated by a archetype known as the self. The self is a natural process to become whole. So, in Jung’s understanding of religious experience, anything that has something to do with an archetype or is controlled by an archetype is therefore deemed religious.

Critique of Jung

First and foremost, Jung's methodology has come under heavy attack. Jung makes the assumption that God exists entirely in the psychic world and cannot be known of any being outside of it. Because Jung only looked to the psychic world and not beyond it, the question is unanswerable.

Jung’s theory of archetypes of archetypes is criticized, the fact that Jung uses the theory is simply not required to explain the evidence that he puts forth. The main point put forward here is the uniform images of God and religious images. For example Geza Roheim, says that seeing as most of humanity share broadly the same experiences, it isn’t surprising that all myths and legends share a lot of similarities.

Carrying on with the concept of archetypes and what further damages their credibility, is the fact that many people do not believe in god. Jung answered this criticism saying that atheism is itself is a religion. This answer led a lot of people to yet again question Jung’s methodology.

Jung’s theory of religious experience is criticized, Jung’s idea of religious experience stemmed from the idea that it occurs within the mind. However many disagree, it has been said that a religious experience is external. If the experience is internal, i.e. psychically, then it cannot be termed religious. For the same reason individuation can’t be seen as a religious experience (Anne Jordan 1999 ).

Conclusion

What have we learned from Freud and Jung on the value of religious belief? Firstly, we look to there conclusions. Freud said that religion has done a great ‘service’ to mankind by helping us evolve and create a civilised society. However, Freud said that religion was a ‘dangerous entity’ and that it must be overthrown as it is the cause of neuroses and the like So, in general, the only value that Freud saw in religion was a tool to protect the human psyche from helplessness and for progression.

Ultimately Freud said that society should be based on science and rational understanding, so therefore religion is essentially useless.

Jung had a different view on religion altogether. To Jung, religion is a device to harmonise the mind and prevent neuroses. So, from Jung’s perspective religion is a invaluable and therefore indispensable to the human psyche.