Fromm, Erich. The Crisis of Psychoanalysis.
The Crisis of Psychoanalysis
What mattered for Freud was not the maximum of ego development, but the optimum reachable by man. He established a normative principle based on his theory of man, namely that man should try to replace id by ego as far as he is able, because the more he succeeds in this endeavor the more he avoids neurotic and – what amounts to the same thing – existentially unnecessary suffering. (24)
In the middle of the twentieth century the problem is no longer that of sexual repression, since with the growth of a consumer society sex itself has become an article of consumption, and the trend in the direction of instant sexual gratification is part of the pattern of consumption that fits the economic needs of a cybernated society. In present-day society it is other impulses that are repressed; to be fully alive, to be free, and to love. Indeed, if people today were healthy in a human sense, they would be less rather than more capable of fulfilling their social role; they would, however, protest against a sick society, and demand such socio-economic changes as would reduce the dichotomy between health in a social and health in a human sense. (26)
Modern academic and experimental psychology is to a large extent a science dealing with alienated man, studied by alienated investigators, with alienated and alienating methods. (47)
This technological value principle means that if we have the ability to travel to the moon, then we ought to go there, without further ado. Similarly, if we have learned how to construct still more devastating weapons, then we ought to go ahead and construct them. In such a perspective technical feasibility becomes a source of all value formation. If, indeed, the norm becomes simply that which it is technically possible to do, then religious and ethical norms have been abdicated. Our traditional spiritual norms were all based on the idea that one ought to do what is good for man, what is true, what is beautiful, what is conducive to his growth and to his aliveness. If we accept the system of norms that says we ought to do anything that we can technically accomplish, then indeed, while we may still pay lip service to our traditional value system, we have in fact abandoned it. (62)
Our consumer culture creates a new vision: If we continue on the path of technological progress, we shall eventually arrive at a point where no desire, not even the ever-newly created ones, remains unfulfilled; fulfillment will be instant and without the need to exert any effort. In this vision, technique assumes the characteristics of the Great Mother, a technical instead of a natural one, who nurses her children and pacifies them with a never-ceasing lullaby (in the form of radio and television). In the process, man becomes emotionally an infant, feeling secure in the hope that mother’s breasts will always supply abundant milk, and that decisions need no longer be made by the individual. Instead, they are made by the technological apparatus itself, interpreted and executed by the technocrats, the new priests of an emerging matriarchal religion, with Technique as its goddess. (81)
The Theory of Mother Right and Social Psychology (1934)
Footnote 1: The relationship which stands at the origin of all culture, of every virtue, of every nobler aspect of existence, is that between mother and child; it operates in a world of violence as the divine principle of love, of union, of peace. Raising her young, the woman learns earlier than the man to extend her loving care beyond the limits of the ego to another creature, and to direct whatever gift of invention she possesses to the preservation and improvement of this other’s existence. Woman at this stage is the repository of all culture, of all benevolence, of all devotion, of all concern for the living and grief for the dead. Yet the love that arises from motherhood is not only more intense, but also more universal….Whereas the paternal principle is inherently restrictive, the maternal principle is universal; the paternal principle implies limitation to definite groups, but the maternal principle, like the life of nature, knows no barriers. The idea of motherhood produces a sense of universal fraternity among all men, which dies with the development of paternity. The family based on father right is a closed individual organism, whereas the matriarchal family bears the typically universal character that stands at the beginning of all development and distinguishes material life from higher spiritual life. Every woman’s womb, the mortal image of the earth mother Demeter, will give brothers and sisters to the children of every other woman; the homeland will know only brothers and sisters until the day when the development of the paternal system dissolves the undifferentiated unity of the mass and introduces a principle of articulation. (98)
Sexuality offers one of the most elementary and powerful opportunities for satisfaction and happiness. If it were permitted to the full extent required for the productive development of the human personality, rather than limited by the need to maintain control over the masses, the fulfillment of this important opportunity for happiness would necessarily lead to intensified demands for satisfaction and happiness in other areas of life. Since the satisfaction of these further demands would have to be achieved through material means, these demands of themselves would lead to the breakup of the existing social order. Closely allied to this is another social function of restrictions of sexual satisfaction. Insofar as sexual pleasure as such is declared to be something sinful, while sexual desires remain perpetually operative in every human being, moral prohibitions always become a source of production for guilt feelings, which are often unconscious, or transferred to different matters. (99)
Summing up, we can say that the patricentric individual – and society – is characterized by a complex of traits in which the docile love for paternal authority, desire and pleasure at dominating weaker people, acceptance of suffering as a punishment for one’s own guilt, and a damaged capacity for happiness. The matricentric complex, by contrast, is characterized by a feeling of optimistic trust in mother’s unconditional love, far fewer guilt feelings, a far weaker superego, and a greater capacity for pleasure and happiness. Along with these traits there also develops the ideal of motherly compassion and love for the weak and others in need of help. (104)
The psychic basis of the Marxist social program was predominantly the matricentric complex. Marxism is the idea that if the productive capabilities of the economy were organized rationally, every person would be provided with a sufficient supply of the goods he needed – no matter what his role in the production process was; furthermore, all this could be done with far less work on the part of each individual than had been necessary up to now, and finally, every human being has an unconditional right to happiness in life, and this happiness basically resides in the “harmonious unfolding of one’s personality” – all these ideas were the rational, scientific expression of ideas that could only be expressed in fantasy under earlier economic conditions: Mother Earth gives all her children what they need, without regard for their merits. (108-109)
Footnote 1: The stimulation and satisfaction of sadistic impulses plays a special role. These impulses grow when other instinctual satisfactions of a more positive nature are ruled out on socio-economic grounds. Sadism is the great instinctual reservoir, to which one appeals when one has no other – and usually more costly – satisfactions to offer the masses; at the same time, it is useful in annihilating the “enemy.” (113)
Psychoanalytic characterology and its relevance for social psychology (1932)
Since character traits are anchored in the libidinal structure, they remain relatively stable. They develop as adaptations to the given economic and social structure, to be sure, but they do not disappear as fast as these structures and relationships change. The libidinal structure, from which these character traits develop, has a certain inertia; a long period of adaptation to new economic conditions is required before we get a corresponding change in the libidinal structure and its consequent character traits. This is the reason why the ideological superstructure, which is based on the character traits typical of a given society, changes more slowly than the economic substructure. (149)
The problem of the “spirit” –i.e., the psychic basis – of capitalism seems to be a particularly suitable example for two reasons. First, because the most relevant part of psychoanalytic characterology for an understanding of the bourgeois spirit – the theory about the anal character – happens to be the most developed part of psychoanalytic characterology. Second, because there is an extended sociological literature concerning this problem, so that the introduction of a new viewpoint seems in order. (150)
What do I mean by the “spirit” of capitalism (or of bourgeois society)? I mean the sum total of character traits that are typical of human beings in this society – the emphasis being on the dynamic function of character…This would include all the expressions of intellectual life and all the character traits that are present in economic endeavors, as well as all goals, value judgments and principles that affect and regulate the behavior of people engaged in this activity. (150)
Getting pleasure and enjoyment out of life is no longer a goal that is taken for granted by the bourgeois psyche, no longer a self-evident purpose that various activities, particularly economic activities, seek to preserve. And this holds true whether we are talking about the worldly pleasures enjoyed by the medieval feudal class, the “blessedness” that the Church promised to the masses, or the enjoyment that a person got out of sumptuous festivals, beautiful paintings, and splendid buildings, and had a great number of feast days. It was understood that man had an innate right to happiness, blessedness, or pleasure; this was viewed as the proper goal of all human activity, whether it was economic or not. (151)
Another change occurred when the notion of duty became central. People no longer engaged in economic activity to maintain an appropriate, traditional livelihood; acquiring possessions and saving as such became ethical norms regardless of whether one enjoyed what one had acquired or not. (152)
Closely associated with this attitude toward property is another trait characteristic of the bourgeois spirit: the importance attached to the private sphere. Quite apart from its content, which may be material or psychic, the private sphere is something sacred; any invasion into this sphere is a major offense. (The strong affective reactions against socialism, to be found even among many who have no property, can be explained in large measure by the fact that it represented a threat to the private sphere.) (153)
In the bourgeois consciousness, this total lack of compassion did not seem unethical at all. On the contrary, it was anchored in certain religious or ethical conceptions. Instead of the blessedness guaranteed to those who were faithful children in the church; in the bourgeois concept, happiness was the reward for doing one’s duty. And this idea was reinforced by the notion that in the capitalist system there was no limit to the success attainable by the competent individual. (154)
This lack of compassion in the bourgeois character represented a necessary adaptation to the economic structure of the capitalist system. The principle of free competition, and the concomitant notion of the survival of the fittest, called for individuals who were not inhibited by compassion in their business dealings. Those who had the least compassion had the greatest chance of success.
Finally, we must mention another (154)
Finally, we must mention another trait whose importance has been stressed by a wide variety of authors: rationality, the principle of accounting and purposefulness. It seems to me that this bourgeois rationality, which has nothing to do with higher forms of reasoning activity, corresponds in large measure with the psychological notion of “orderliness” that we have described. (154)
Epilogue
The majority of people are not death lovers. But they can be influenced, especially in times of crisis, by the desperate necrophiles – and death lovers are always desperate. (160-161)
Above all it can help to discover the necrophilous and biophilous elements in oneself; to see this struggle, and to will the victory of one’s own love of life against its enemy. Speaking in the name of man, of peace, or of God – these words remain ambiguous unless they are accompanied by a word with which to begin and end: “In the name of Life!” (161)