|
2.
We're moving out of the Freudian era into a new age By
Tom O'Connell We're
moving out of the Freudian era into a new age. And this movement has
been going on now for decades. During much of the 20th Century,
psychotherapy and spirituality seemed to be at odds with each other. But
in recent years I have detected a growing willingness to heal the split.
After all, how can an attempt to heal a person's mind ignore the vital
importance of a client's spiritual essence and belief system? Sigmund
Freud, who rose to great prominence in the world of psychoanalysis,
seemed to have a mental block against giving a high value to the world
of the spirit. He was a brilliant and egotistical man, who deserves
credit for trying to view psychology as a science, but in his attempt to
remain "scientifically objective" with his patients he tended
to play down the inherent mysteries in religion, mysticism,
spirituality, and human life itself. Instead
of accepting the concept that we humans are spiritual beings with
physical, mental, emotional, and social aspects, he moved in the
opposite direction, and suffering from a substantial blind spot, he
tended to discount the importance of the spiritual. Reviewing
his own career, Freud writes with great pride, "I myself dared to
venture to make the first attempt into the problems of the psychology of
religion in 1910, when I compared religious ceremonials with neurotic
ceremonials." Can Freud's bias against the world of the spirit be
more clearly stated? Freud's
negative views on religion also come to the fore when he writes about a
case in which a patient is "forced to experience" the New
Zurich therapy (C.G. Jung's approach) as if the therapy is some kind of
torture. This patient reports, "each session made tremendous
demands on me....Some of these demands were: inner concentration by
means of introversion, religious meditation, living with my wife in
loving devotion, etc. It was almost beyond my power, since it really
amounted to a radical transformation of the whole spiritual man....All
that this physician recommended any clergyman would have advised, but
where was I to find the strength?" What
is interesting here is that Freud, in trying to prove his own point,
seems to be contradicting himself. While referring to an experience with
psychoanalysis, the patient uses words that lump introversion, or
looking within, together with other factors that Freud would have
preferred to discredit. After all, looking within to find answers is
what psychotherapy is all about, including Freud's. In truth, the
psychoanalyst is simply a catalyst for the client's introspection. However,
looking deeply within for divine guidance is also at the heart of
spiritual growth, and that kind of behavior would fit in with Freud's
idea of "neurotic." If given the opportunity, I think Freud
would have been likely to label Jesus as a neurotic when he told people
to go into their closets and pray, and said, "The kingdom of God is
within you." A
close look at Freud's use of the words "religious meditation"
tells me that he is standing on the other side of the spiritual fence.
And as for living with one's partner in an atmosphere of devotion, is
there something wrong with that? Also, does Freud think the
"radical transformation of the whole spiritual man" is a
problem instead of a solution? Well,
it seems like we've spent a major part of the 20th Century trying to
remove God from psychology, the schools, the economy, relationships, and
every other place. But finally we have arrived in the post-Freudian era.
Views about the mind/spirit connection have been shifting dramatically
in recent decades. And the split is beginning to heal. We're
in a time when the world of the spirit, with its basic optimism and
hope, is coming back strongly. However, this is not without the loyal
opposition. While the quest for spiritual meaning is rapidly growing, at
the very same time the worship of materialism, with its built-in
pessimism and its basis of fear, is escalating. It's
very interesting to observe this play of opposing philosophies. And what
I find most interesting about all of this is that the Twelve Step
addiction recovery programs, which have been widely accepted throughout
the world of traditional medicine in the second half of this century,
never got themselves lost in Freudian psychology. Instead they adopted a
spiritual basis for living as the antidote for self-poisoning with toxic
substances. And they did this in the late 1930s when the Freudian
approach was beginning to catch on. Also,
it just happens that psychologist Carl Jung, Freud's rebellious pupil,
helped set the stage for the formation of AA when he told an
alcoholic patient that his only hope for a cure was a spiritual
conversion. Freud would never have adopted such a stance. And the rest
is history. Millions have been guided toward sober and wholesome lives
through a spiritual development program that features the human spirit
instead of setting aside the spiritual domain for the sake of
"scientific" objectivity. As if dealing with the mysteries of
the human mind can be resolved through science! |
|
- Back - |