Kelly Taylor

HACU 227 Philosophy of Religion

Assignment 4

December 17, 2001

The Ethical Necessity of Religion

Many religious philosophers have discussed the role of religion in a particular culture, but some of the most interesting writings on the subject are those that discuss the role of religion in humanity and human civilization as a whole. The Future of an Illusion by Sigmund Freud investigates this concept in greater detail than many previous analyses of the subject. It is interesting, however, that despite his more detailed analysis and psycho-analytic approach, Freud's conclusions did not vary widely from those of Kant and Hume. This paper will discuss Freud's account of the role of religion in human society and briefly compare it to points made by Immanuel Kant and David Hume.

Freud's makes a fundamental distinction between human existence and human civilization, which is the basis of his account of humanity's complex relationship with religion. Civilization is created by humans with explicit purposes: to dominate and exploit the natural world for the resources it provides to us and to regulate access to those resources by certain individuals or groups.(Freud, 6) This accumulation of resources indicates wealth, which then has to be guarded and distributed according to the laws of the society. Because humans set up a structure in which the few govern the many, it is necessary to guard the wealth resources against those who wish to steal it for themselves, as well as from nature which tends to destroy it. Freud, 7) Therefore, says Freud, "every civilization must be built up on coercion and renunciation of instinct." (Freud, 8)

Mankind's natural hatred of work combined with the powerlessness of intellect over instinct require a careful structure of coercion and renunciation to maintain the civilization. (Freud, 9) The primary instincts that must be guarded against, incest, cannibalism and murder, have been prohibited for many thousands of years, and constitute the earliest steps mankind took towards civilization.(Freud, 13)

The degree to which the coercive and renunciative behavior is internalized, or the morality level of a society, is but one form of "mental wealth" a society can potentially posess.(Freud, 15) The other "compensations" civilization offers its conscripts are art, patriotism or nationalism, and most importantly, religion,.(Freud, 15) Other than cannibalism, the prohibitions against other antisocial insticts are not as clearly enforced, and in many cases are only adhered to under direct threat of punishment, which is also true of other negative behavioral tendencies in humans, such as "avarice, their aggressive urges or their sexual lusts...lies, fraud and calumny."(Freud, 14) Even with prohibitions against them, many people will indulge these impulses as long as they believe they can get away with it. When death is no longer an end, but a beginning of a new world where good is rewarded and evil is punished, this life is then seen as a path to perfection and is motivated by the drive to reach a higher state of existence.(Freud 23) Kant would argue that this adherence to the bare minimum of rules and only when not morality but prudence, because one is acting only in one's own interest, or at best attempting to force a reward in heaven as promised by the tenets of the religion. (Kant, 159)

Civilization fulfills its ultimate goal and purpose of defending humankind against nature by removing terror from life and the universe and by satisfying man's curiosity about nature, which Freud refers to as the "humanization of nature."(Freud, 20) When the forces of nature become humanized they are seen as sentient, malevolent, beings that can be reacted to in the same way that humans react to the powerful, dangerous humans that govern the human world.(Freud, 21) Freud agrees with Hume in The Natural History of Religion when he says that the outward projections of primitive man's concerns and fears are the only outlet and way of understanding the world, which Freud calls an "infantile model," wherein humans personify everything in order to understand and control them. (Freud, 28; Hume, 29) The feeling of helplessness causes humans to create the archetype of these protector gods in the image of the father, who then has the threefold responsibility to "exorcize the terrors of nature," "reconcile men to the cruelty to fate," and "compensate them for the sufferings and privations" of civilization. (Freud, 22)

Freud believes that civilizations create the ideas of religion because they are not self-evident and we would not be able to discover them for ourselves. In western Christianity religious ideas are transmitted culturally, not through divine revelation, and denying this fact denies the history of the civilizations that created them (Freud, 27) Here Freud disagrees with Kant, who accepts Christianity as a self-evident yet revealed (whether divine or not being less important) but on the subject of the role of religion in society, they agree completely. Ideal goal of civilization would be one where people raised in a culture of civilization and reason would not need the coercion and renunciation, but would make the necessary sacrifices of their own accord.(Freud, 9) Freud doubts this will be possible without a great deal of coercion, and instead states that perhaps the nearest compromise mankind could reach is to shift the balance of the number of people that are hostile towards civilization to a minority instead of a majority.(Freud, 10) The reason he states for this skepticism is because of the power of the instinct.(Freud, 13)

Freud argues that the belief in divine revelation of a religion denies the existence of a historical process and the context of the development of the religion.(Freud, 27) Kant delcares that divine revelation is unnecessary for a true religion, but also believes the historical evolution of a religion is equally irrelevant in comparison to the moral value of the rules and duties of a religion, and should be able to be totally forgotten and still retain the basic elements of that faith.(Kant, 154-155)

Religious ideas are teachings and assertions about facts and conditions of external (or internal) reality which tell one something one has not discovered for oneself and which lay claim to one's beliefs" (Freud, 31) What are our own rationalizations of why we subscribe to religious beliefs? 1) because they were believed by our ancestors 2) because we have proofs handed down by our ancestors 3)it is forbidden to question the authenticity of the beliefs and claims of the ancestors. This third reason for belief induces insecurity in the belief system of the ancestors, because if the first two reasons were actually true, the evidence could be presented to anyone.(Freud, 33) According to Kant, this would not then be a true religion at all, and by reason should not be followed. proposes, and arrive at the same conclusions.(Kant, 154)

Freud gives two further methods of justifying belief in religion. First is the concept of "I believe because it is absurd" set forth by many early Christian fathers, which relies on the idea that religious doctrine is above reason.(Freud, 35) Freud argues that if one adheres to this philosophy, one must believe every absurdity, or if not, one must invent a way to determine which absurdities to believe and which not. If someone claims divine revelation, how can that necessarily apply to everyone else?(Freud, 36) The second method is the idea that we must behave "as if" we believed the church doctrines in order to maintain the cohesion of society and civilization.(Freud, 36) The argument Freud gives against this approach is that like all fairy tales, if it is known at heart to be false or at least unprovably true, it will no longer be adhered to.(Freud, 37) The results of this lack of belief are potentially catastrophic, and therefore an alternative must be found. But first, the role of religion in the structure and function of society must be understood.

Despite his many criticisms, Freud recognizes the importance of the role of religion in society. In the voice of his opponent, he says of religious doctrines, "Our civiliztion is built up on them, and the maintenance of human society is based on the majority of men's believeing the truth of those doctrines." He acknowledges the posibility that without religion, society will collapse into chaos, because the religious gifts of inhibition and fear prevent humans from following their "asocial, egoistic instincts."(Freud, 44) Further, he understands that the "As if" theory could be in our best interest to maintain, even if there was a way to prove the lack of existance of God.(Freud, 44)

By putting these arguments in the voice of his opponent, he denies them. He says "civilization runs a greater risk if we maintain our present attitude to religion than if we give it up."(Freud, 45) However, many people are dissatisfied with civilization today, and the disgruntled either seek to change or completely withdraw from it., which somee would blame on the rise of science.(Freud, 47) As scientific discoveries increase and become common knowledge, "the more widespread is the falling-away from religious belief" though not without a fight, as evidenced by the "'monkey trial'" in Tennessee, which attempted to ban the teaching of evolution in public school.(Freud, 49) The result of this movement away from religion towards science is inevitable, and as soon as the uneducated masses realize that the elite leaders of civilization no longer believe in God, without the benefit of their own intellectual enlightenment, Freud fears they will attempt to destroy the civilization they are so instinctually hostile towards.(Freud, 50) If the laws of society were built on religious reasoning, and the religion is proven false, what is compelling them to obey the laws? Only brute force will be the law, and therefore either the masses must be prevented from attaining intellectual awareness, or "the relationship between civilization and religion must undergo a fundamental revision.

Freud was not the only person to come to similar conclusions. According to Hume, the natural state of religion is polytheism. The cause of all religion is fear, and fear is also used to enforce the duties of the religion.(Hume, 65) Humans attempt to abate their fears by praising and placating the deities.(Hume, 70) However, Hume advocates that the goal of all religions should be based on the concept that "nothing but morality could gain the divine favour," though he is cynical in thinking that this is actually possible. (Hume, 70-71) Religion should be founded on "reflection, such as public spirit, filial duty, temperance, or integrity" and the idea that "promoting the happines of his creatures" is the best way to serve the divinity. (Hume, 72)

Kant continues this line of philosphy, stating that anthropomorphism, or in Freudian terms, "humanization" of both nature and the gods, is dangerous to our morality, because by doing so "we are making a God for ourselves" (Kant, 165) Religion should be composed of nothing but laws and practical principles (Kant, 164) There can be no particular duties to God in Kant's ideal of a pure religion, because "God cannot receive anything from us; we cannot act on him or for him."(Kant, 153) Only the idea of God and the admission that there is a possibility of God are necessary for the pursuit of a religion. We can never know God's true wishes, unless we are to believe in divine revelation (which is unnecessary and uncertain), therefore there can be no specific duties towards God. In Kant's view, only the "ethico-civil duties of humanity "of human beings to human beings" is part of true religion. (Kant, 153) Everything else is irrelevant.

Kant's views closely resemble Freud's "As if" philosopher. Freud, however, has a different approach, suggesting that the commandment to not kill one's neighbor was made out of self-interest and for the sake of the community. He claims that one who killed for hatred or property would soon be attacked for the same reasons or out of revenge by the slain person's family, either one at a time or by a group. A law or commandment prohibiting murder would serve the community or civilization as a whole.(Freud 51-52) In a religious worldview, this commandment is ascribed to God, but Freud's problem with this is similar to Kant's: humans are thereby pretending to know the will of God, and the law is dependent on the existence of that God.(Freud, 52)

Religion is too inconsistent and contrary, and varies widely from place to place. A law based on commonality of humanity can not be refuted on religious ideals. Freud also suggests that by leaving God and religion out of the legal realm, acknowledging the human necessity of the laws, the masses that now seek to overthrow civilization would then seek to improve it, because they would understand that the laws are there to serve and protect their interests, not restrain and limit them.(Freud, 53)

Freud points out the problems inherent in this approach are caused by the powerlessness he sees of reason and the intellect over the instinctual passions and impulses.(Freud, 53) The evidence he gives for this trend is the history of what actually happened in "primitive man": the innate relationship between father and son, and the extension of that conflict into the realm of the spiritual, as he discusses in Totem and Taboo.(Freud, 54) He believes that the hatred of the son for the father, and subsequent murder and guilt was the actual origin of the prohibition against murder, not the idealized rational explanation of human civilization.(Freud, 54)

The hope that Freud holds against this theory is that just as humans pass through stages of development, so does humanity as a whole. Early man's relationship with the father-god figure parallels that of a small child's helplessness and dependence and resentment of its father. Humankind's relationship with religion can be understood as an "obsessional neurosis" and just as neuroses are treated with psychotherapy, Freud sees now as the time for "replacing the effects of repression by the results of the rational operation of the intellect," which in the example would be the community-based prohibition against murder instead of the religion-based one.(Freud, 56) Humans must now move away from the symbolic understanding of history, religion, and the laws of civilization and look at the truth of their existence and necessity.(Freud, 57)

This moving towards truth and realism is also necessitated by the damage that religion causes in humankind. Religion is obeyed out of fear and threats, but as soon as people realize that others no longer fear the threats of religion, they will also stop fearing.(Freud, 59) The lethargy and narrow-mindedness of most adults might also be lost, as he points out that education of children primarily consists of repressing or "retardation" of sexuality and religious instruction designed to overpower the intellect once it finally develops.(Freud, 60) "How can we expect people who are under the dominance of prohibitions of thought to attain the psychological ideal, the primacy of the intelligence?"(Freud, 61) The answer is that we cannot and therefore religious indoctrination at a young age must be ceased so that we can find out whether or not the intellect is really that much weaker than the instinctual passions of humanity.(Freud, 61-62) He acknowledges the difficulty of this undertaking, comparing the sudden cessation of religion to the cold-turkey quitting of a drug, and pointing to Prohibition in the United States, which sought to remove all drugs and replacing them with religion.

The only cure he presents is the removal of religion as a way to protect humanity from the realities of the world, which would then force us to accept our helplessness and insignificance in the universe, and instead of clinging to our infantile state, move on, mature and grow up as a species.(Freud, 63) He admits that this is the ultimate goal of his writing, hoping that we will soon be forced to face reality and fend for oneself, using scientific knowledge and other resources available to us, and we will thereby "successd in achieving a state of things in which life will become tolerable for everyone and civilization no longer oppressive to anyone."(Freud, 63)

I find it fascinating that all three writers in all three periods have come to very similar conclusions: that the European (and by extension, American) practices of religion are false at best and self-destructive at worst. Although Freud seemed to disagree with how Kant in particular advocated moving past the Church doctrines of his time, the end results were the same. All advocate change from a spiritual, ritualistic, deity-based belief system to one of reason, rationality, science and intellect. Perhaps this is the way of the future and is truly the best or only way to advance through the lifecycle of civilization. In the years since these works were published, it certainly seems that we (Europe and America) are moving in that direction very rapidly and dragging the rest of the world with us. However, as Freud's hypothetical opponent feared, the backlash against the removal of such a powerful drug might very well be the destruction of us all.

Works Cited

Freud, Sigmund. The Future of an Illusion. New York, NY, W. W. Norton & Company: 1961.

Hume, David. The Natural History of Religion. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press: 1956.

Kant, Immanuel. Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1998.