Thank Freud for a new way to interpret Christianity and most religions! Please comment?

Question

Freud stated that the human persona is made up of three main elements, the Super Ego, the Ego, and the Id.

The Super Ego is the "I should" part of people, AKA the conscience.

The Ego is where the Super Ego and Id collide, fighting for their place in waking, living reality.

The Id is the "I want" part of us, AKA desires.

Now, let's play with these concepts a little.

Super Ego has similar traits of the Crown Chakra (located just above your head), so, we can say that, in a way, the Super Ego is our connection to the Divine or Spirituality. Heaven, if you will.

The Ego has similar traits of the Heart Chakra (gee, I wonder where this one's found), which can be compared to our waking, living conscious being.

The Id has similar traits of the Root Chakra (base of the spine) which is our basics wants, needs, and, huzzah, desires. Thusly so, in Hell people are punished for their desires. So, the Id can be considered Hell.

So, in a way, Christianity could be considered -

- an Enlightment religion, if followed in this way.

As such, the Heaven and Hell concepts can be switched to the Christian God and the Christian Satan, thusly making Jesus' statement as being "the son of God" into one where he is simply stating he mainly follows his Super Ego.

"... because the kingdom of God is within you..." -- Luke 17:21

Answer 1

Excellent. I would make the Heart Chakra the Superego and the Crown Chakra, but that is unimportant. It's a well-thought out question. Still, I don't believe that Christianity can become an "enlighted" religion simply by comparing the Chakras to Bible stories and characters. For the most part, Christians already associate Satan with evil (Id), Christ with morality (Superego), and, say Judas with the the positive and negative qualities of choice and consciousness (Ego). I DO believe, though, that it can be considered this way and I love how you wrote it. The entire definition of Christianity would have to change completely and I believe a new name would be in order.

Good thinking! Now if only people can understand the metaphors and stop believing the fictional aspects we'll have a great universal upheaval on our hands, as opposed to the blood and sacrifice of innocent people. Go, change!

Answer 2

As always, your perspective gives me new food for thought, and a reason to analyze theory that would otherwise not be thought of. Indeed, I found it interesting. Try using another person's theory, Freud is more crazy than intelligent. Jung, Fromm, or another psychological person is a better idea.

Answer 3

You can find out what Freud thought of religion. See "The Future of an Illusion".

Answer 4

Religion isn't that simple and neither are Freud's theories but in effect you're using a new religion (Freud's theories) to explain the old one (Christianity) - Analyze that! lol

Answer 5

Some are very religious about Freud, and I wonder why that is. They criticize, advocators of religious ideas for failing to deal with reality. They say they deal wherever possible, with hard facts, putting theories up for debates and scrutiny. Freud was anything but this. He frequently based his theories on the existence of unobservable energies, based on his own unsubstantiated, untestable interpretation of his client‘s narratives and behavior. Freud did not merely fail to test his theories, he ignored much of the evidence he had, and even falsified and destroyed data .
Freud created theories that were not testable, and disobeyed the Rule of Occam’s Razor (an important rule especially in the social sciences), that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary the simplest explanation is normally the correct one.
The fact that no-one could criticise Freud suggests that Freud did not really want his theories to be tested. Anyone who disagreed with him was accused of “unconscious resistance” a defence mechanism, where people are reacting against the theories due to their sexual nature.

Freud’s faulty methodology led to some odd conclusions. An example is on child abuse. Originally, as Freud was listening to his clients, he came to the conclusion that there was a huge amount of child sexual abuse going on in society, but often as adults people are unable to remember it. In 1895 Freud developed his “seduction theory” in which he said his hysterical patients had suffered child abuse, their inability to deal with it leading to their hysteria. People didn’t like this idea, and in 1897 he wrote to Fliess saying he had changed his theory, coming to believe in “false memory syndrome”, whereby clients who feel guilty about their own childhood sexuality project this onto adults who “abused” them i.e. it was their fantasy. This theory was later published in 1905. This view of the survivors of child abuse continues to be held by many to this day. Freud’s theorising was based on the same “data” with no scientific explanation for his change of mind.

Freud’s whole perspective on psychological distress is that it is due to faulty sexual development in childhood. Although clearly early experiences and sexuality are important factors, and Freud made an important discovery when suggesting that children experience sexuality at all, we know that these are not the only factors influencing mental health.

Many of the conclusions that Freud came to, served to justify, and pathologise prejudices against the traditionally oppressed in our capitalist society: women and children. But the whole point in Feud‘s theories is that he uses the experiences and conclusions of childhood to explain adult psychological behavior. Freud believed that adult women continued to be haunted by “penis envy” resulting in the “problem” of the “masculinity” of women!











.

Answer 6

Freud is dead and is body is pushin' up daisies... why thank him for something He had nothing to do with. Jesus is still alive and is the author of wisdom, knowledge, and enlightenment... we should be thanking Him, not some dead guy.

Answer 7

My brain hurts, philosophy & psychology are totally not my areas of specialty.

Answer 8

Do you think of this kind of mishmash as a salad or a stew?

Answer 9

What a crock of crap. Freud would just tell you that you want to do your daddy.

Answer 10

Simplistic, but if it works for him, perhaps that is all he is capable of.