Psychoanalysis as religion
Freudian psychology has an ambiguous attitude to sexual drive. On the one hand Eros is a positive and creative force. On the other hand sexual drive has a primitive, omnipotent, egocentric, vicious and formidable instinctual nature that must be supressed for the general welfare. Freudian psychology paradoxically assumes that the success of sexual maturation is proportional to the rate of restriction of sexual desire. It preaches that psychological repression is a required prophylactic measure during the everlasting war with the libido. The perfect psychosexual development therefore must end procreation. And if in reality this does not happen, as theory hints, it is only because sexuality is so insatiable that any war against it is doomed to fail.
Noticeably, religion shows the same ambiguous respect to sexuality. It attempts to trim sexuality by anathemas and circumcision without impairing its procreative ability. Freudian psychology inherits the restrictive, fearful and equivocal attitude to sexuality of the Abrahamic religions. The religious tabooing of sexuality appears to be the model of the psychological repression in psychoanalysis.
The idea that sexuality is vicious sounds quite familiar to most of us. The reason is that it harmonizes with the doctrine of the Original Sin we are more or less indoctrinated with. The taboo on sexuality originates from the morals of the almighty penalizing asexual god of the Old Testament. The view that sexual maturation is based on fear and restriction closely resembles the chastity ideal disseminated by Abrahamic religions.
Both the ancient Jewish writs and psychoanalysis assert that the restriction of sexuality improves man. Freudian psychoanalysis seems to row in the same boat with the sacred and nowadays almost secret motives for circumcision that are reduction of sex-lust. It also seems to be one of its modern offshoots. By omitting the mental effects of circumcision Freudian psychology indirectly backs the morals of the circumcising religion too. Psychoanalysis is a scientific expression of the Abrahamic fear of sexuality.
Psychoanalysis spreads ancestral sin among nonbelievers
Long ago had religion linked sexuality to evil and Freud found things this way. Religion has tabooed sexuality and burdened sexual desires with guilt for millennia so it is not surprising that Freud discovered that libidinal desires are persistently rejected from the consciousness. Religion moralizes that unrestricted sexuality leads to perversions and psychoanalysis reconfirmed this in psychiatric terms. Religion continuously holds laymen’s sexuality in check by confessions, psychoanalysis – by therapeutic sessions. Abrahamics’ morals have rendered sexuality formidable and have prepared mentality for the claims of psychoanalysis. Freud deemed sexuality so dangerous because religion has ubiquitously supressed it including by inflicting a chronic erogenous deficiency on him.
of the unconscious activities of the mind.
The ethics of Freudian psychology appear to be a modern replica of the religious morals that reverberate outside churches. Through fear, the sexually suppressing religious morals have long since divided human psyche into acceptable and unacceptable drives. It seems that this has preconditioned the triumph of psychoanalysis that has found sexual thoughts are stuck in the closet of the mind. Freudian psychology inherits the religious anti-sex agenda and disseminates it in wider atheistic circles of society.
The ancestral sin charges believers with sexual guilt and alienates them from their emotions. Psychoanalysis does the same with sceptics. In essence, the Freudian psychology reinvented the Original sin and reintroduced it to the general public. It reconfirmed that the forbidden fruit is bitter using modern methods. Like religion it omitted to notice that the very ban may have embittered the fruit in the first place.