 |
|
Title: The Future of an Illusion
ISBN: 0393008312
Author:
Sigmund Freud
James Strachey
Peter Gay
Publicate Date: 1989-08
Publish: 1989-08
List Price: $12.95
Average Customer Rating: 4.0
Format: Paperback
 |
|
|
|
|
Amazon Lowest New Price: $7.16
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $5.93
Amazon Merchant Price: $9.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Customer Review: |
|
1: A must-read for all that are interested in Psychology or just can't get enough of Freud
This is a great read for anyone who is interested in the field of Psychology or Philosophy or anyone that is interested in Freud, whether an avid reader or new to his works. This book takes an amazing look and analysis of the world of religion and its effects on civilization and the individual, which can still be applied to our present civilization. Anyone who can appreciate the work of great thinkers will definitely enjoy this work. My only complaint is that it is so short.
|
2: Concise and Hits at the Heart of the Matter
I decided to buy this book after having seen it referenced by many contemporary thinkers (e.g. Daniel Dennett) in their books. Sigmund Freud, the famous Austrian psychiatrist, writes about mankind's struggle with religion and considers what civilization or society would be like if weaned of it. His arguments - bear in mind this book was first published in 1927 - are of the kind a modern-day informed atheist might secretly wonder. I found myself nodding in agreement with a number of Freud's matter-of-fact observations about religion.
For example, he says that mankind will likely focus their energies and learn to adapt to the (harsh) realities of this life if they withdrew their expectations from the vacuous promises of the hereafter. The style of writing is clear but a little weird at times, especially when he pretends to be another party and questions himself on the ideas being argued. In summary, Freud appears to have believed that mankind, in the not-too-distant future will have found a way to go about his daily life without believing in gods or the supernatural and that science will have a significant role in it. I particularly like the last paragraph of the book which states: "No, our science is no illusion. But an illusion it would be to suppose that what science cannot give us we can get elsewhere."
At 67 pages the size of Reader's Digest magazine (not including the biographical introduction), this little blue book is moderate-level reading for anyone interested in the psychology of religious beliefs. It is also a nice addition to any library. I personally, bought this edition because it is rather difficult to find where I live.
|
3: Sometimes Freud is just Freud
This book describes religion as a universal mental illness, which says it all. As such, Freud predicts a time when we can rise above it.
"Religion would thus be the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity; like the obsessional neurosis of children, it arose out of the Oedipus complex, out of the relation to the father." If this is true, then Freud supposes that "a turning away from religion is bound to occur with the fatal inevitability of a process of growth, and ...we find ourselves at this very juncture in the middle of that phase of developement."
It is worth reading quickly, as it makes the same few points over and over.
|
4: Freud and Illusion
This is a very slim text that addresses some very big issues. I would recommend it as part of any Freud collection and also for any collection on religion. Certainly a requirement that one have at least a primer on Freudian concepts so the nature of Illusion can be placed into some kind of meaningful context.
|
5: Roger Schmeeckle Misrepresents Freud
In his 27 Feb 2006 review of Freud's The Future of an Illusion, Roger Schmeeckle misrepresents Freud's explanation (on pages 38-42 of this Norton publication) between Illusion and Delusion.
Roger correctly identified Freud's concept of Delusion as "something that is believed that is not true" -- but then oversimplifies by stating that Freud said an Illusion is "something that may be true or false, but is believed because we want to believe it."
This oversimplification ignores what Freud goes on to say, "Illusions need not be necessarily false - that is to say unrealizable or in contradiction to reality. For instance, a middle-class girl may have the illusion that a prince will come and marry her. This is possible; and a few such cases have occurred. That the Messiah will come is much less likely. Whether one classifies this belief as illusion or something analogous to delusion will depend on one's personal attitude."
The point being, that while the "absolute" truth or falsity of an illusion is debatable - common sense and reason enable us to infer or deduce where the truth actually lies. For instance, it IS possible that the Sun will rise in the west tomorrow (as I am unable to prove something false which has yet to occur), but I would be a fool and utterly devoid of reason and intellect to presume that it will occur.
Roger then asserts that Freud was "not so much atheistic as irreligious." That Freud was irreligious is certain (what atheist wouldn't be) -- but I do not understand how anyone can read The Future of an Illusion and not easily conclude that the author was a confirmed atheist. The entire work is a testament to atheism. Accordingly, it is absurd to suggest that because Freud does not simply state "I do not believe in God" there is reason to infer that he may have believed in one.
Roger continues by arguing that Freud had a "bias" or "prejudice" against religion, whereby Freud's "wish" for there to be no God led him into his own Illusions of atheism. This is quite a stretch and a distortion of Freud's dissertation -- which has at its core the fundamental assertion of reason and the power of the intellect to overcome humankind's infantile and primitive need for "wish fulfillment" in the form of a protective and benevolent God.
And in a final shot, Roger accusing Freud of being a prisoner of his times -- a subject of "materialistic determinism" -- and for not having investigated or being familiar with "the evidence and reasoning of those who defend their own religious belief."
Yet, that Freud was all too familiar with and understanding of the nature and roots of religious beliefs is the hallmark of The Future of an Illusion. That he might have been a "materialistic determinist" is unknown to me -- but that he was a genius as well as great "Humanist" with a profound regard for and understanding of the Human Race seems clear.
|
|
|
|
|
