Wrestling with Freud and Jung on God and Religion
by Matheus Yuhlung
According to Freud, religion is nothing but the manifestation of repressed materials known as neurosis. It is an illusion, he’d say; the only reason why a man submits to this idea of a higher self – this mysterious power called God is because he is probably feeling that powerful feeling called guilt that he’d been experiencing (or is going through).
To which Carl Jung would’ve added up; yes! This problem of believing in God or should I say the problem of man believing that God exists is purely a super empirical reality or in a better word – a psychological reality.
Though both Freud and Jung won’t believe in the existence of God, they seem to acknowledge this pattern of a believe system called religion, which the former sees it as a disease and the later as a problem. But if God does not exists then how did religion come into existence; the premise of religion being worshiping of God? Is it because of guilt and an empirical feeling?
Agreed, but does guilt not an outcome of the acknowledgment of committing something wrong? While, right and wrong being what we called morality. And what is morality but not the means of meeting the telos of religion that is pleasing worshipping God?
Now, the sense of morality differs throughout ages, cultures and society, but there are some definitive sets of right and wrong that we can all agree upon. In other words, there exists subjective morality and a unifying set of ideas that forms a sense of integrity in this variation called objective morality.
If this fact, that there exists an idea of morality above human subjectivity, does not proofs the existence of God then what will?
Photo Credit: criticsatlarge.ca