CHAPTER SIX The Historical Limits of the Established Reality Principle The preceding analysis tried to identify certain basic trends in the instinctual structure of civilization and, par­ ticularly, to define the specific reality principle which has governed the progress of Western civilization. We desig­ natedthis reality principle as the performance principle; and we attempted to show that dpmination and aljenatjon, derive~rom_tillLp.!~v~l~1l.LSJ>,Qa l _@g~p iza ti on of labor, de­ termined to a large extent the demands ~p~ s ed .iEon- the instincts by this reality principle. The question was raised whetlier the continue<f'iUi-e ·or the performance principle as the reality principle must be taken for granted (so that the trend of civilization must be viewed in the light of the same principle), or whether the performance principle has perhaps created the :greconditi~r a qualitatively differ­ ent,_non-repressive reality principl~ This question sug­ gested itself when we confronted the psychoanalytical the­ ory of man with some basic historical tendencies: (1) The very progress of civilizatiun under the perform­ ance principle has attained a level of productivity at which the social demands upon instinctual energy. to _~ spent in alienated labor could be considerably reduced. Conse- 13° EROS AND CIVILIZATION HISTORICAL LIMITS 131 quently, the continued repressive organization of the in­ torical) character of the reality principle. If sexuality is in stincts seems to be necessitated less by the" struggle for its very essence antisocial and asocial, and if destructiveness existence" than by the interest in prolonging this struggle is the' rri-anifestation of a primary instinct, then the idea of - by the interest in domination. a non-repressivereality principle would be nothing but idle (2) The representative philosophy of Western civiliza­ speculation. tion has developed a concept of reason which contains the Freud's instinct theory indicates the direction in which domineering features of the performance principle. How­ the problem must be examined. The performance prin­ ever, the same philosophy ends in the vision of a higher ciple enforces an integrated repressive organization of sexu­ form of reason which is the very negation of these features ality and of the destruction,instinct. Therefore, if the his­ - namely, receptivity, contemplation, enjoyment. Behind torical process tended to make obsolete the institutions of the definition of the subject in terms of the ever transcend­ the performance principle, it would also tend to make obso­ ing and productive activity of the ego lies the image of the lete the organization of the instincts - that is to say, to re­ redemption of the ego: the coming to rest of all transcend­ lease the instincts from the constraints and diversions re­ ence in a mode of being that -has absorbed all becoming, quired by the performance principle. This would imply that is for and with itself in all otherness. the real possibility of a gradual elimination of surplus-repres­ The problem of the historical character and limitation of . sion, whereby an expanding area of destructiveness could the performance principle is of decisive importance for be absorbed or neutralized by strengthened libido. Evi­ Freud's theory. We have seen that he practically identifies dently, Freud's theory precludes the construction of any the esta!?lis~~~ _r~ali~y pr~nciple (i.e., the performance prin­ psychoanalytical utopia. If we accept his theory and still ciple) with the reality principle as such. Consequently, his maintain that there is historical substance in the idea of a dialectic of civilization would lose its finality if the per­ non-repressive civilization, then it must be derivable from formance principle revealed itself as only one specifichistori­ Freud's instinct theory itself. His concepts must be ex­ cal form of the reality principle. Moreover, since Freud amined to discover whether or not they contain elements also identifies the historical character of the instincts with that require reinterpretation. This approach would paral­ their" nature," the relativity of the performance principle lel the one used in the preceding sociological discussion. would even affect his basic conception of the instinctual There, the attempt was made to " read off" the ossification dvnamic between Eros and Thanatos: their relation and J of the performance principle from the historical conditions its development would be different under a different reality which it has created; presently, we shall try to " read off " principle. Conversely, Freud's instinct theory provides from the historical vicissitudes of the instincts the possibil­ one of the strongest arguments against the relative (his- ity of their non-repressive development. Such an approach 132 EROS AND CIVILIZATION HISTORICAL LIMITS 133 implies a critique of the established reality principle in the two levels: (a) the phylogenetic-biological level, the devel­ name of the pleasure principle - a re-evalution of the an­ opment of the animal man in the struggle with nature; tagonistic relation that has prevailed between the two di­ and (b) the sociological level, the development of civilized mensions of the human existence. individuals and groups in the struggle among themselves Freud maintains that an essential conflict between the and with their environment. The two levelsare in constant two principles is inevitable; however, in the elaboration and inseparable interaction, but factors generated at the of his theory, this inevitability seems to be opened to ques­ second level are exogenous to the first and have therefore a tion. The conflict, in the form it assumes in civilization, is different weight and validity (although, in the course of the said to be caused and perpetuated by the prevalence of development, they can "sink down " to the first level): Ananke, Lebensnot, the struggle for existence. (The later they are more relative; they can change faster and without stage of the instinct theory, with the concepts of Eros endangering or reversing the development of the genus. and death instinct, does not cancel this thesis: Lebensnot This difference in the origin of instinctual modification un­ now appears as the want and deficiency inherent in organic derlies the distinction we have introduced between repres­ life itself.) The struggle for existence necessitates the re­ sion and surplus-repression; 2 the latter originates and is sus­ pressive modification of the instincts chiefly because of the tained at the sociological level. lack of sufficient means and resources for integral, painless Freud is well aware of the historical element in man's in­ and tailless gratification of instinctual needs. If this is true, stinctual structure. In discussing religion as a specific his­ the repressive organization of the instincts in the struggle torical form of " illusion," he adduces against himself the for existence would be due to exogenous factors - exoge­ argument: "Since men are so slightly ::menable to reason­ nous in the sense that they are not inherent in the" na­ able arguments, so completely are they ruled by their in­ ture " of the instincts but emerge from the specific his­ stinctual wishes, why should one want to take away from torical conditions under which the instincts develop. Ac­ them a means for satisfying their instincts and replace it cording to Freud, this distinction is meaningless, for the by reasonable arguments?" And he answers: "Certainly instincts themselves are " historical"; 1 there is no instinc­ men are like this, but have you asked yourselves whether tual structure "outside" the historical structure. How­ . they need be so, whether their inmost nature necessitates ever, this does not dispense with the necessity of making it? "3 However, in his theory of instincts, Freud does not the distinction - except that it must be made within the draw any fundamental conclusions from the historical dis­ historical structure itself. The latter appears as stratified on tinction, but ascribes to both levels equal and general valid- 2 See page 37 above. 1 See, for example, Beyond the Pleasure Principle (New York: Live­ 3 Th e Future of an Illusion (New York: Liveright Publishing Corp., right Publishing Corp., 1950), pp. 47, 49. 1949), p. 81. 134 EROS AND CIVILIZATION HISTORICAL LIMITS 135 ity. For his metapsychology, it is not decisive whether the Our re-examination must therefore begin with Freud's anal­ inhibitions are imposed by scarcity or by the hierarchical ysis of the,death instinct. distribution of scarcity, by the struggle for existence or by We have seen that, in Freud's late theory of the instincts, the interest in domination. And indeed the two factors­ the "compulsion inherent in organic life to restore an the phylogenetic-biological and the sociological- have earlier state of things which the living entity has been grown together in the recorded history of civilization. But obliged to abandon under the pressure of external disturb­ their union has long since become" unnatural" - and so ing forces" 4 is common to both primary instincts:_].r.9§ has the oppressive" modification" of the pleasure principle and death instinct. Freud regards this retrogressive tener by the reality principle. Freud's consistent denial of the ency~as " a ii " e;p ;e s s i o n of the " inertia " in organic life, and possibility of an essential liberation of the former implies ventures the following hypothetical explanation: at the time the assumption that scarcity is as permanent as domination when life originated in inanimate matter, a strong" ten­ - an assumption that seems to beg-the question. By virtue sion " developed which the young organism strove to relieve of this assumption, an extraneous fact obtains the theoreti­ by returning to the inanimate condition." At the early stage cal dignity of an inherent element of mental life, inherent of organic life, the road to the previous state of inorganic even in the primary instincts.