Nolan Dahm Broderick 6 Freud Assignment

How did your character challenge traditional European ways of thinking about religion, morality and human behavior?

Freud challenged religion by basically stating that it was an illusion that was just a justification for underlying emotional distress and neuroses. He suggested that religion was just trying to give structure to social groups, fulfill wishes, was an infantile delusion and was just an attempt to control the outside world. Moreover, he perceived religion, with its suppression of violence, as mediator of the societal and personal, the public and the private, conflicts between Eros and Thanatos, the forces of life and death. (Juergensmeyer). When focusing on morality Freud suggested that we look at dreams because dreams are where our thoughts and more irrational desires (id) are actually expressed without being told what to do by the superego which is the thoughts that society tells us are moral and the mold that we are forced to fit in to which isnt necessarily right. Freuds writings about human behavior also stem from dreams and from infantile sexuality. He believes that nothing you do occurs by chance; every action and thought is motivated by your unconscious at some level. In order to live in a civilized society, we have a tendency to hold back our urges and repress our impulses. However, these urges and impulses must be released in some way; they have a way of coming to the surface in disguised forms. He also explains that all children have a sexual desire for the parent of an opposite sex which would probably be frowned upon.

A civilization that leaves so large a number of its participants unsatisfied and drives them into revolt neither has nor deserves the prospect of a lasting existence- satisfying our needs should come first because without it there is no point to life at all.

I have found little that is "good" about human beings on the whole. In my experience most of them are trash, no matter whether they publicly subscribe to this or that ethical doctrine or to none at all. That is something that you cannot say aloud, or perhaps even think- most humans do not fulfill their desires which makes them trash (probably?)

A man should not strive to eliminate his complexes but to get into accord with them: they are legitimately what directs his conduct in the world. we need to accept our flaws and give into our desires

In the unconscious every one of us is convinced of his own immortality.- we do not ever think about death because we cannot fathom what it actually is: nothingness. When people think about death they can think of torture and blackness but their irrational and rational minds cannot wrap around what nothing actually is.

Where should you sit and why? Who would you be tense with? What topics of conversation would you bring up to make others uncomfortable?

Sitting with Nietzsche would probably be a decent fit because there isnt really any clash in their ideas of society. Although Nietzsche has some extreme ideas, their views on religion are very similar which is a very important factor when trying to prevent strife. Also sitting next to Carl Jung (EARLY YEARS) wouldnt be too bad considering he was a student of Freuds even though Jung help some religious belief. Their later years, Freud developed a hatred toward Jung due to his different practices and beliefs so it depends on the time period whether or not the two would get along very well at a dinner party. Sitting with anyone who has strong religious beliefs would be quite troubling given that Freud rejects all forms of religion and some of his views go against the moral code of almost every religion. Bringing up the rejection of religion would be especially troubling because many at this time were deeply religious. Also, bringing up infant sexuality and that no child is innocent could be quite controversial because many people have children and this viewpoint could hit very close to home for many of his people. Sitting by any woman wouldnt fit very well either because he is subtly sexist.

If you (JUNG) were in a psychoanalysis session with Dr. Freud how do you think he would analyze you? What might be a dream, trouble spot, disagreement, etc. in your life? Freud would see Jung as someone who has the right ideas but some sort of neurotic idea because he isnt allowing himself to let sexuality be the driving force in his life which is really bad. Also, his rejection of the overwhelming pessimism that Freud believed would be troubling in a session because Jung believed that dreams could be a source of creativity not just repressed thoughts and motivations. The main disagreement and cause of the split of Freud and Jung would be that Freud treated his pupils using talk therapy where people would explore their inner selves while

Jung treated his pupils as patients and examined them which was the antithesis of what Freud sought to do. Freud thought that Jung was making his patients become either slavish sons or impundent puppies

2-3 dinner conversation topics OR who do you want to ask a question of and why?

Pope: what is the point of being Pope besides attempting to control the outside world through religion? It would spark a debate about what religion is and how it actually works in society.

Conversation topic: Would the rejection of religion be widely accepted in Europe during his time? Good question that makes us examine what actually went on and how people would have looked at Freuds ideals during this time period.

Sources Source 1: Juergensmeyer 2009, p. 895; [http://books.google.com/books?id=g0QQtlJSyOEC&pg=PA439 Marlan, Leeming and Madden 2008, p. 439; Fuller 1994, pp. 42, 67; Palmer 1997, pp. 3536

Source 2: Jones, Ernest. Sigmund Freud: Life and Work, vol. 1. London: Hogarth Press, 1953, pp. 9496