Civilization and Its Discontents: Freud

Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents

Socrates on Freud's Civilization and its Discontents:

Religion, the nature of man and the value of inquiry

According to Sigmund Freud's Civilization and its Discontents, certain aspects of human nature are immutable. In some ways I do agree with this: I believe that every human being has a certain, innate tendency or ability to do something uniquely well. That is why I devised my vision of an ideal society as a philosophic kingdom, in which those deemed most fit to rule will rule; those who are most fit to defend the body politic are charged with protecting it, and those most fit to perform trades are charged with these manual laboring tasks. However, Freud seems to suppose that everyone is driven by the same urges, namely that of sex, and all other aspects of culture, including the drive for philosophical knowledge are actually a displacement of this urge so human beings can fit into civilization.

I do not believe that the fundamental drive of all human beings is desire but rather knowledge. In fact, it is only casting away the bodily desire that we truly become liberated and can throw off our chains and see past the shadows of the walls on the cave. The world we live in is an illusion and it is the world of the forms that is the higher, true reality. Freud sees civilization as a good thing, in some ways, in the ways it disciplines the ego to reality: it "recognizes an outside, the external world... afforded by the frequent, unavoidable and manifold pains and unpleasant sensations which the pleasure-principle, still in unrestricted domination, bids it abolish or avoid" (Freud 3). But I would argue that reality is often a denial of the truth that lies within, just as I was able, with prompting to guide a young man never schooled in geometry through a philosophical proof in the dialogue Meno.

Both Freud and I would concede that some form of civilization, some form of society is necessary. Of course, I have often stood apart from Athenian society, such as when I was condemned for supposedly corrupting the youth in Athens when I was merely disquieting people by asking provoking questions. But I conceded to drink the cup of hemlock because I had agreed to the rules of Athenian society, not because I felt that the laws by which I was condemned were just. Even though I might disagree with the dictates of Athenian society, as elucidated in the Apology, that does not mean that I believe all societal constructions are wrong. I just believe that there are better ways to organize society in pursuit of the truth.

For it is the truth, not sexual gratification, that must be humanity's ultimate purpose and it is here that Freud and I part ways. Freud has said: "scientific work is another deflection of the same kind. The substitute gratifications, such as art offers, are illusions in contrast to reality, but none the less satisfying to the mind on that account, thanks to the place which phantasy has reserved for herself in mental life" (Freud 7). Freud believes that scientific work -- including, presumably philosophy -- is merely displacement and a kind of 'substitute gratification' for reality much like intoxicating substances -- or religion. However, I believe that sexual activity and the life of the body distract from the true reality of the forms. Sexuality is (among many other things) the actual 'substitute gratification.' It is the way people hide away from what is truly real and meaningful. I agree to some extent with Freud that the religion of the Greeks was a distraction from the truth and reality with its extremely anthropomorphic conceptions of the divine (this is one reason I was also accused of atheism by my critics) but I see religious dogmatism as actually suppressing human being's higher aims to be part of something 'oceanic' (as Freud terms it). This sense of participating in the world of the forms -- once again I stress -- can only come with philosophy and questioning.