OBSESSIVE ACTIONS AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICES
SIGMUND FREUD
|
Sigmund Freud. The Standard Edition... Vol.
IX.
Translated by James A Strachey.
London: The Hogarth Press, 1959. Vol. 9\Religion\Obsession\Obsessive
Neurosis\displacement\1906-1908\
Sigmund Freud, physiologist, medical doctor,
psychologist and father of psychoanalysis,
is generally recognised as one of the most
influential and authoritative thinkers of
the twentieth century. Working initially
in close collaboration with Joseph Breuer,
Freud elaborated the theory that the mind
is a complex energy-system, the structural
investigation of which is a proper province
of psychology. He articulated and refined
the concepts of the unconscious, of infantile
sexuality, of repression, and proposed a
tri-partite account of the mind's structure,
all as part of a radically new conceptual
and therapeutic frame of reference for the
understanding of human psychological development
and the treatment of abnormal mental conditions.
|
Editor's note:
This is the first paper Freud ever wrote
dealing with religion. It is said to foreshadow
the lines of thought which are developed
more fully in Totem and Taboo. (It also approaches
lines of thought found in Civilization and
Future. The editor also notes that this article
is the first instance of Freud discussing
Obsessive neurosis since Studies in Hysteria.
Not only does this article provide a sketch
of what Freud meant by obsessive neurosis,
it also relates to his case study of the
Rat Man (Volume X, second part).
Freud begins this article by remarking that
there is more than a superficial resemblance
in the relationship between the obsessive
acts of neurotics and religious observances.
In other words, he considers obsessive ceremonials
to be of the same class as obsessive thinking,
ideas, impulses, etc. For the obsessive neurotic
ceremonials appear as small adjustments to
particular everyday activities which are
carried out in a precise or methodologically
varied, manners. Such actions are very formal
even though they may seem to us, and indeed
to the patient, to be meaningless. Still
the person who participates in such actions
is incapable of giving them up. And, in fact,
any deviation from these activities is responded
to by feelings of intolerable anxiety which
requires immediate reparation.(117)
Freud says this of obsessive ceremonials:
"The performance of a ceremonial can
be described by replacing it, as it were,
by a series of unwritten laws." That
is, the special contentiousness with which
an obsessive act is carried out and the anxiety
which follows upon its neglect stamp the
ceremonial as a 'sacred act.'
In fact Freud notes that any actions may
be subject to the possibility of becoming
obsessive if it is elaborated by small additions
or is given a rhythmic character by means
of pauses or repetitions. (118) Freud notes
that both compulsions and prohibitions at
first apply only to solitary activities and
for a long time do not affect one's social
behaviour. It is when the obsessive acts
start to affect the individual that it become
particularly dysfunctional.
Let's look at some of the resemblances and
differences between religious acts and obsessive
ceremonials. Similarities: 1] there are in
both cases qualms of conscience caused by
neglect of the actions; 2] such actions tend
to be completely isolated from all other
actions (prohibitions against interruptions);
3] there is a high degree of contentiousness
in which both religious actions and obsessive
acts are carried out in minute detail.
Differences:
There is a greater degree of variability
in neurotic rituals as compared to the relative
stereotyping of religious actions; obsessive
rituals are private whereas religious rituals
are public; obsessive rituals appear to be
foolish and senseless compared to the high
degree of significance and symbolic meanings
in religious rituals. Nonetheless, even if
obsessive actions appear to be meaningless
to us, Freud notes that they actually have
a logic and meaning of their own, which psychoanalysis
can interpret. Freud notes that obsessive
actions are 1] perfectly significant in every
detail, 2] serve important interests of the
person involved, and 3] give expression to
experiences which are still operative and
to thoughts which are attached to the effect.
(119-120)
As we can see, although it may appear that
he is making a direct comparison of obsessive
actions and religious rituals, Freud merely
wishes to juxtapose the two to point out
that there are indeed similarities between
the two. In other words, he never says that
the two are the same. In fact he writes:
"In this respect an obsessive neurosis
presents a travesty, half-comic and half
tragic, of a private religion." (119)
Freud goes on to note that there are two
ways for obsessive actions to find expression.
These are as follows: by 1] direct representation,
or 2] symbolic representation. To Freud,
as we might have expected, what is represented
is derived out of the individual's most intimate
experiences and his or her early sexual experiences.
(120)
On p. p. 120ff Freud outlines several examples
of obsessive actions and their significance
through which we can distinguish between
direct and symbolic representation.
Returning to the theme of the similarities
between religious rituals and obsessive actions,
Freud points out that one of the conditions
of the illness is that the patient obeys
compulsions and carries them out without
understanding their chief meaning. In other
words, such actions are said to serve unconscious
motives and ideas. Whereas in religious practices,
the ordinary, pious individual does not concern
themself with the significance of the ceremonial
even if the officials are familiar with this
meaning. That is, the motives which impel
the religious person to their religious actions
are unknown to them or are represented in
consciousness by other reasons (symbolically)
which are advanced in the place of the original
motives.(122)
Freud then takes up the theme of motives.
First, there are three motives outlined for
both the religious individual and the obsessive
neurotic. 1] the obsessive neurotic is said
to be compelled by some unconscious guilt
which has as its source the early mental
events of the obsessive person. Such unconscious
guilt is constantly revived by renewed temptations
which arise out of any contemporary provocation
from either the internal or external worlds.
2] The obsessive actions occasion a "lurking
sense of anxiety." That is, there are
expectations of misfortune, linked to the
idea of punishment following the internal
perception of the temptation. 3] The connection
between that which causes the arousal of
anxiety and the danger that it imposes is
always hidden. Hence there is the need for
the setting up of defensive mechanisms --
to avoid the danger of anxiety.
In terms of the religious, the following
is the case: 1] there is a sense of guilt
found in the protestations of the pious that
they know in their hearts that they are miserable
sinners 2] and thus they compulsively employ
pious observances to preface every daily
act, and 3] every unusual undertaking seems
to be imputed with the value of defensive
or protective measures (e. g., prayers for
protection). (122- 124)
Freud goes on to note that in obsessive neurosis
the emphasis is on the repression of impulses
of the sexual instinct. It is during the
repression of these instincts that a special
contentiousness is created which is directed
against the instinct's aims. But this defense
(reaction formation?) seems insecure to the
obsessive and thus is constantly threatened
by the desires of the unconscious instincts.
Therefore the influences of the repressed
instincts are felt as a temptation and this
causes the arousal of anxiety. Hence we can
see that the repression that occurs in obsessive
neurosis is only partially successful and
increasingly fails, thus leaving the obsessive
in a state of never ending conflict. Therefore,
fresh psychical efforts are constantly required
to keep the repressed under control in attempts
to protect the self against the expected
illness or punishments. But as soon as the
protective measures are deemed to be ineffective,
prohibitions begin to take place of the obsessive
actions. (124)
As we can see the symptoms of the obsessive
neurotic fulfill the conditions of being
a compromise, a compromise between the warring
forces of the mind -- the instinctual desires
and the desire to avoid the consequences
of those desires. In the religious sphere,
on the other hand, Freud suggests that 1]
the formation of religions are based upon
the suppression or renunciation of certain
instinctual impulses. It is important to
note, however, that these impulses are not
those that are found in the neurosis -- i.
e., which is of an exclusive sexual nature--
but are self-serving, socially harmful instinctual
desires (ego instincts). 2] The sense of
guilt, resulting from continual temptations,
and the produced anxiety appears in the form
of fear of divine punishment. This suggests
that because of the admixture of sexual components
and some general characteristics of instincts,
the suppression of instincts proves an inadequate
and interminable process in religious life
as well. (125) In other words, just as the
obsessive actions of the obsessive neurotic
were unsuccessful in ridding the individual
of the sense of guilt and anxiety, so is
it the case in the religious attempt to rid
the self of the notions of sin, guilt and
anxiety.
Freud points out that the mechanism of displacement
(when an idea and its affect are separated
from one another but both remain accessible
to the conscious mind -- if they were not
split from one another they would be too
objectionable and some other form of defense
would have to take place -- repression, distortion,
secondary revisioning, etc.) also functions
as a defense in that it helps to diminish
the mental processes of obsessive neurosis.
He writes:
It cannot be denied that in the religious
field as well there is a similar tendency
to displacement of psychical values, and
in the same direction, so that the petty
ceremonials of religious practice gradually
become the essential thing and push aside
the underlying thoughts. That is, in both
cases -- the obsessive and the religious
-- there is a tendency of the splitting of
the idea from its emotional content and the
subsequent displacement of one or the other
onto an alternate idea (form emotional content)
and affect (for the idea). This is indicative
of the view which sees obsessive neurosis
as a pathological counterpart of the formation
of religion, and to describe that neurosis
as an individual religiosity and religion
as a universal obsessive neurosis. (126)
In conclusion, Freud found that the most
essential similarity is between religious
practices and obsessive actions is in 1]
the underlying renunciation of the activation
of the instincts that are constitutionally
present; and 2] the chief difference is in
the nature of the instincts, which in the
neurosis is exclusively sexual in origin,
while in religion they spring from egoistic
sources. That is, in the neurosis the instinctual
desires that imputing themselves and cause
the erection of the defenses is purely sexual
in origin -- relating to the Oedipus complex;
while religious prohibitions are aimed at
an admixture of instinctual desires which
are out of both the sexual drives and the
drives for self-preservation in general.
Thus it is the progressive renunciation of
constitutional instincts, whose activation
might afford the ego primary pleasure, appears
to be one of the foundations of the development
of human civilization. (127) That is, civilization,
from this point of view, requires each individual
to sacrifice individual pleasure for the
satisfaction of the deity. From this point
of view we may conclude, as did Freud in
Future and Civilization, that religions function
as an oppressive mechanism which seeks to
control humanity's instinctual or animal
natures.
|