Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
I've always found George Lakoff quite a tragic thinker, politically, because he begins with such rich, promising ideas--about the role of metaphor in politics, about the significance of the unconscious and the family romance in determining conscious political preferences--and then draws from them such silly, pedestrian conclusions about what these metaphors really are and what conservatives and progressives really feel.
He took these phenomenally interesting ideas right to the edge of his own unconscious, left them there--just where they might have become interesting--and came out swinging for a so-called progressive agenda (and, presumably, for his mommy, who must have been very nurturing, if a bit interfering).
What made Freud such an eternal genius was his ability to see beyond his own unconscious agenda--sometimes--and to take his ideas all the way to a genuinely original conclusion. For example: In the course of treatment, Freud observed, female patients often fell in love with their analysts. Freud’s lesser colleague Otto Breuer had observed the same phenomenon; he concluded that his patients fell in love with him because he was so lovable. Like Lakoff, Breuer began with an interesting observation, then concluded from it what he wished to conclude.
In Freud’s modesty lay his genius. The patient’s love, he concluded, was induced by the analytic relationship. This relationship, unlike any the patient had ever experienced, allowed her to perceive in her analyst a transferred imago of her infantile attachments. Her vision of the analyst was a projection, and her love was sham. This was a fascinating insight; only Freud could see it.
That's why Ricochet's Sunday text for discussion is Civilization and its Discontents. I've linked to the whole book. If you haven't read it, I can't strongly enough encourage you to. I find an observation of great profundity on almost every page. It's a fundamental, seminal text for conservatives. Or for me, anyway.
The Communists believe they have found a way of delivering us from this evil. Man is wholeheartedly good and friendly to his neighbour, they say, but the system of private property has corrupted his nature. The possession of private property gives power to the individual and thence the temptation arises to ill-treat his neighbour; the man who is excluded from the possession of property is obliged to rebel in hostility against the oppressor. If private property were abolished, all valuables held in common and all allowed to share in the enjoyment of them, ill-will and enmity would disappear from among men. Since all needs would be satisfied, none would have any reason to regard another as an enemy; all would willingly undertake the work which is necessary. I have no concern with any economic criticisms of the communistic system; I cannot enquire into whether the abolition of private property is advantageous and expedient. But I am able to recognize that psychologically it is rounded on an untenable illusion. By abolishing private property one deprives the human love of aggression of one of its instruments, a strong one undoubtedly, but assuredly not the strongest. It in no way alters the individual differences in power and influence which are turned by aggressiveness to its own use, nor does it change the nature of the instinct in any way. This instinct did not arise as the result of property; it reigned almost supreme in primitive times when possessions were still extremely scanty; it shows itself already in the nursery when possessions have hardly grown out of their original anal shape; it is at the bottom of all the relations of affection and love between human beings--possibly with the single exception of that of a mother to her male child. Suppose that personal rights to material goods are done away with, there still remain prerogatives in sexual relationships, which must arouse the strongest rancour and most violent enmity among men and women who are otherwise equal. Let us suppose this were also to be removed by instituting complete liberty in sexual life, so that the family, the germ-cell of culture, ceased to exist; one could not, it is true, foresee the new paths on which cultural development might then proceed, but one thing one would be bound to expect, and that is that the ineffaceable feature of human nature would follow wherever it led.
Use the comment thread, if you will, to enter what you find to be the most important remark in the book, and to justify your choice. Or to enter your strongest criticism. I'm sure there will be many.
- Comment (23)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
May '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Bingo. Claire you really hit a homerun here with respect to Lakoff. I saw him speak about 20 years ago and it was obvious that he is capable heavy lifting (Women, Fire and Dangerous Things reinforces that impression), but I had an inchoate nervousness about him, which you choatified. He starts with a conclusion and works back from there.
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
I love the word "choatified." And yes, it's a real case of "so close and yet so far." But that's normal--cf Otto Breuer. It is very, very rare to be able to reach conclusions other than the ones you're looking for; I have no idea how well I've ever done it. (By definition, one wouldn't know.) I've certainly changed my mind about many things, but never in as deep a way as would be suggested by Freud's realization, "No, actually, I'm not that lovable, there's something more interesting going on here."
Sep '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Being a raving papist, I consider Freud's former pupil and critic Rudolf Allers a much more interesting thinker, with Paul C Vitz's book on Freud Sigmund Freud's Christian Unconscious being a fascinating work of criticism.
And, yes, my judgments are personally infallible.
Sep '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Freud and Hitler shared a neighborhood. They also shared the ambition to convince other men of the one and only truth that they had come upon, one with brilliant rhetoric, the other with brutal force. Adored by their followers they founded powerful movements. In my eyes both Adolf Hitler and Sigmund Freud were false prophets of the twentieth century."
Dr. Sophie Freud
Sigmund´s Freud granddaughter
Professor of Psychology at Simmons College in Boston
Sep '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
I'm also surprised that no one mentioned Philip Rieff (The Therapeutic Age, The Mind of the Moralist) in situating Freud's influence on modernity.
Aug '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
"The Communists believe they have found a way of delivering us from this evil. Man is wholeheartedly good and friendly to his neighbour, they say, but the system of private property has corrupted his nature."
This is simplistic; profoundly wrong on its face. The hundred-plus studies of identical twins separated at birth - who didn't know they had a twin, yet lived identical lives - prove the existence of genetic destiny.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20030413/ai_n12863703/
We know now human beings are not blank slates when they enter the world, and come forth loaded with genetic programming of every kind. A small percentage are sociopathic; destined to wreak terrible havoc on us. If they're also endowed with a high IQ, and grow up within a certain kind of family, they will become powerful malignant narcissists.
Many are destined to follow them due to their impaired moral compass. Some are destined to be saintly - or disciples - and will challenge them. Some will enforce the laws, if possible.
"The soft bigotry of low expectations" is a quote that comes to mind. The universe is clearly a foundry, and we are all being tried, purified, and tested within it.
May '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
River, I think we may be more inclined to make certain decisions because of particular genetic characteristics, but I wouldn't use the phrase "genetic destiny" to describe our condition since it seems too deterministic.
May '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
I'm a raging Papist too. But I agree with you, Claire, about Freud's genius. And the passage you quote reminds me a lot, actually, of John Paul II, who analyzed the first few chapters of Genesis so closely.
Man and woman were created in a state of innocence; they lived in harmonious, fruitful communion with each other and friendship with God.
The fall disrupted all that and set up a master/slave dynamic between men and women. The hermeneutics of power. The story of human life ever since.
The only possible answer: Love, which even when omnipotent, eschews mastery and prefers service.
(This, BTW, is why conservatives should be committed to protecting the family. It's the original free society, whose interior "theme" is not power, but love.)
May '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Psued,
I'm an admirer of Paul Vitz too.
Sep '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
T/Y for the book I’ll read and maybe comment. If Freud had gone on to conclude that many analysts became analysts because they enjoyed and looked forward to their female patient’s projections I would have been more impressed with his modesty.
Aug '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Check out the twin studies I mentioned. I don't see any way around the term 'destiny'. But that doesn't mean our lives are on a single steel track to a single end.
Oct '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Ahhhhh! My eyes! If our assignment is to read "Civilization and its Discontents," can we please at least read this one? :-)
Oct '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Two observations:
1) Parents of identical twins can tell the twins apart. Often, so can their friends. There are some aspects of even "identical" twins that aren't identical, which is to say, determined by their genes.
2) I'm adopted, and met my birth mother's family before she died. So I have first-hand experience of the nature vs. nurture question, from which I conclude that both are significant.
That's an interesting definition of "destiny." :-) With that said:
"It only ends once. Anything that happens before that is just progress." — Jacob
Jun '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Not to be pedantic, but I've checked the OED and was unable to find "choatified". I grant that it is likely a derivative of inchoate: meaning just begun and so not fully formed or developed, also meaning confused or incoherent: as in inchoate proletarian protest. As used in the above sentence the antithetical meanings of inchoate is implied. If anyone has a reference for "choatified" I would appreciate it being posted.
May '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Freud's modesty didn't prevent him from tracing everything back to sexual impulses. The man was myopic and foolish, if intelligent and imaginative. From what I recall of his writings, including Civilization and its Discontents, Freud's logic was spotty at best, though sometimes insightful. Like Darwin and Nietzsche, his ideas provided fertile ground for cultural corruption.
Jun '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
Communism and its other related "isms" continually harp on private property as the root of all envy and avarice. Private property is just one facet of human life, it is not a primary determinant of human behavior nor an obstacle to the impossible measure of equality. As was said about sexuality, human nature has many ways to exhibit envy and avarice. That is why it is impossible for any "objective" system to root out the most basic forces of nature. If we remove private property, then we'll envy privilege, the better view of a state-issued apartment, access to better goods due to better connections, the natural preference for one person over another, and on and on. The private property and equality arguments are the biggest lies ever foisted upon the world. Ironically, it is also very human. I could go on and on, but no matter how good it all sounds, it still doesn't work. That's one of the big mysteries and struggles of humanity.
Jul '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
My dog ate "Civilization and its Discontents".
May I report on L. Ron Hubbard's "Dianetics" instead?
They're both about equally fraudulent.
Edited on Nov 7, 2010 at 11:18amRe: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
If you've got a lot of leisure time, I've written a lot on Rieff. His most important single insight is probably the one in "One Step Further" (that's a Sade reference) -- the epilogue of the 3rd edition of Freud: The Mind of the Moralist. There, he presses his thumb squarely on Freud's terribly pragmatic repression of the possibility of a third unconscious.
Sep '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
James Poulos, Ed.
If you've got a lot of leisure time, I've written a lot on Rieff. His most important single insight is probably the one in "One Step Further" (that's a Sade reference) -- the epilogue of the 3rd edition of Freud: The Mind of the Moralist. There, he presses his thumb squarely on Freud's terribly pragmatic repression of the possibility of a third unconscious. · Nov 7 at 11:36am
I am always happy to add another member of the Georgetown Poli Mafia to my collection. I assume that you know Fr Schall?
Sep '10
Re: Civilization and its Discontents: The Unconscious, the Irrational, Lakoff and Freud
He took these phenomenally interesting ideas
I'm a fan of Robert Sokolowski's books on Phenomenology, so I have to confess that I find Lakoff's musings about metaphor stunningly bereft of any kind of meat.
Edited on Nov 7, 2010 at 11:47am