Erich Fromm and His Criticism of Sigmund Freud Romano Biancoli
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Propriety of the Erich Fromm Document Center. For personal use only. Citation or publication of material prohibited without express written permission of the copyright holder. Eigentum des Erich Fromm Dokumentationszentrums. Nutzung nur für persönliche Zwecke. Veröf- fentlichungen – auch von Teilen – bedürfen der schriftlichen Erlaubnis des Rechteinhabers. Erich Fromm and His Criticism of Sigmund Freud Romano Biancoli Presentation at the International Symposium on: Erich Fromm – Life and Work, May 12-14, 1988, Centro didattico in Locarno, Switzerland - „Erich Fromm and His Criticism of Sigmund Freud,“ in: Erich Fromm - Life and Work, Symposium of the International Erich Fromm Society 1988 in Lo- carno, Tübingen (Private Print) 1988. Copyright © 1988 by Dr. Romano Biancoli; 2011 by the Estate of Dr. Romano Biancoli, Via Antonio Codronchi, 110, I-48100 Ravenna. 1. pay such extremely painful human prices as well as that of scientific organization; nor did he live Freud (1856-1939) and Fromm (1900-1980) are to see the tragic events of Soviet communism two great and very different masters of psycho- and the degeneration of the western democra- analysis, extraordinarily creative and radically cies into societies of „conspicuous consump- original, who succeeded in opening new per- tion“. Every age lives its risks and its tragedies. spectives and alternatives to the history of think- Fromm found himself face to face with thermo- ing. Examination of the relationship between nuclear warfare and environmental pollution their theories raises considerable problems of pervading the entire planet. method. When it is desired to relate one theo- Another complication of the examination of retical construction to another, as a first ap- the Freud-Fromm relationship lies in the diver- proach, one may proceed, in two ways: either sity of their relative cultural pictures as a refer- an analytical-comparative approach, which pre- ence point. From this point of view, it cannot scinds of historical periods, establishing identity, simply be said that Fromm is an author who correspondence, analogies, differences and con- came later, and hence more modernly trasts, or a genetic approach, which grasps and equipped. This is not only true but obvious, and illuminates the derivation of the second theo- can be seen every time two authors who are not retical body from the first. Both approaches are contemporaries are studied. The noticeable legitimate and useful, but in our case, one with- point is that the philosophical terrains in which out the other risks becoming a series of observa- Freud and Fromm are rooted represent perspec- tions, useful enough, but insufficient to convey tives of thought that are different enough from the sense of internal movement and exquisite- each other for connotations not entirely bound ness of the styles of the two structures of to historical periods. If they had their Judaism in thought. common, Freud’s positivism and Fromm’s radi- The Freud-Fromm relationship is of such cal humanism separate them. Freud’s formation complexity that it cannot be contained within a was in the Viennese scientific and academic en- history of psychoanalysis seen as a history of vironment at the end of the nineteenth century, techniques and the theories of these techniques. where research in the natural sciences was shap- One reason for all this lies in the distance of ing a methodology and an epistemology capa- nearly half a century between the two authors. ble of defining limits and capacities of science. Freud did not live to see the second world war Fromm brings to fruition a humanistic course, nor to investigate Nazism, to which he had to which in modern times grew out of Spinoza, page 1 of 8 Biancoli, R., 1988b Erich Fromm and His Criticism of Sigmund Freud Propriety of the Erich Fromm Document Center. For personal use only. Citation or publication of material prohibited without express written permission of the copyright holder. Eigentum des Erich Fromm Dokumentationszentrums. Nutzung nur für persönliche Zwecke. Veröf- fentlichungen – auch von Teilen – bedürfen der schriftlichen Erlaubnis des Rechteinhabers. found themes in Feuerbach and in the Hegelian Freud to criticize historical materialism5, in that left, up to its taking form in the eminent pages this theory, in explaining the genesis of ideolo- of Karl Marx. The differences and the incom- gies, did not take into consideration the under- patibilities that we find between the two mas- ground moral code, unconsciously transmitted ters of psychoanalysis are quite often due to this from one generation to the next. Freud’s criti- assumption of two different lines of thought. cism seemed to have hit upon the question, A further problem of method is that of how however Fromm’s shifting the line of attack to proceed in detecting correspondences, dis- made it meaningless, still before his reflection on tances, irreconcilabilities. One completely legiti- social „filters“ cast new light on the formation of mate way could be the historical and biographi- ideologies. cal-cultural approach. From the mid-twenties to Fromm was already in America, taking part early thirties, the young Fromm was a student of in the great process of revising classical psycho- Freud’s, accepted his theories, used the concept analysis started by a select team of scholars, of libido in his scientific studies. His early crea- among whom Sullivan, Horney, and Thompson. tivity was not concerned with theoretical pro- As concerns criticism of the theory of instincts, posals1, such as the one of „social character“, or emphasis on the cultural factor, a new approach of absolutely new methods in empirical re- to child psychology, revision of the concept of search2. It was a time when prestigious psycho- transference: on these themes Fromm’s elabora- analysts was attempting a union between psy- tion was autonomous, but in harmony with the choanalysis and Marxism, giving rise to a specific work of this illustrious American colleagues. body of literature, which had a revival in the Starting from the early 1940’s we have a long 1970’s.3 series of his great books, in which he gives rec- In 1936 we find Fromm attacking Freud’s ognition to his cultural debts. He gives credit to second topic. By now the line of divergence has Freud over and over again, even though he been established, and will lead Fromm further knows that he is an author who cannot be classi- and further away from the founder of psycho- fied in any school6. Fromm presents the analysis. The „Sozialpsychologischer Teil“ of the achievement of his own cultural identity, he is a „Studien über Autorität und Familie“4 is aimed master with his own teachings. at demolishing the concept of superego to re- This is the problem of method: either to place it with the theme of authoritarianism, ex- follow Fromm’s line of growth, underlining the pressed in sadomasochist psychodynamics. It is changing of his relationship to Freud’s thinking noted that the concept of superego allowed with chronological criteria, or to keep the high level of the peaks reached by the authors and to see them carry on a dialogue from here, or even, often, turn their back on each other. This 1 Fromm, E. (1932a), Über Methode und Aufgabe ei- ner Analytischen Sozialpsychologie, Gesamtausgabe second approach involves assuming some of the (GA) I, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Stuttgart 1980, p. more significant tracts of Frommian thought, 37-57; ders., Die psychoanalytische Charakterolo- those which constitute the arches and hold up gie und ihre Bedeutung für Sozialpsychologie, GA I, the other aspects, and comparing them with p. 58-77. Freud’s theoretical nuclei, grasping derivations, 2 Fromm, E. (1980a), Arbeiter und Angestellte am contrasts, independencies. Both criteria being Vorabend des Dritten Reiches - Eine sozialpsycho- valid, the second one is chosen here as it is be- logische Untersuchung, GA III, 1981, p. 1-230. lieved to lead to the center of some basic 3 Gente, H.P. (Hrsg.) (1970), Sexpol, Guaraldi, Bolo- themes with greater immediacy. gna 1971; Reich, W., Sapir, I., Fromm, E., Psi- coanalisi e marxismo, Samonà e Savelli, Roma 1972; Reich, W., Fromm, E., Riazanov, D., Fraen- 5 Freud, S. (1932b), Neue Folge der Vorlesungen zur kel, B., Brohm, J.M., Contro la morale borghese, Einführung in die Psychoanalyse, in: Opere, Vol. Samonà e Savelli, Roma 1972. XI, Boringhieri, Torino 1979, p. 179-80 und p. 281. 4 Horkheimer, M. (1936), Studien über Autorität und 6 Fromm, E. (1955b), The Human Implications of In- Familie, Alcan, Paris; Fromm E. (1936a), GA I, p. stinctivistic „Radicalism“. A Reply to Herbert Mar- 141-187. cuse, GA VIII, 1981, p. 113. page 2 of 8 Biancoli, R., 1988b Erich Fromm and His Criticism of Sigmund Freud Propriety of the Erich Fromm Document Center. For personal use only. Citation or publication of material prohibited without express written permission of the copyright holder. Eigentum des Erich Fromm Dokumentationszentrums. Nutzung nur für persönliche Zwecke. Veröf- fentlichungen – auch von Teilen – bedürfen der schriftlichen Erlaubnis des Rechteinhabers. in Freud’s thinking: a life instinct and a death in- stinct are hypothesized. No longer libido but the new concept, Eros is enhanced, warms up, gives 2. the idea of love as the capacity of uniting, bind- ing, integrating. Fromm, nearly eighty-years old, One of the themes dealt with by psychoanalysis will pay homage10 to the early eighty-year-old is love. It may be considered non-scientific, but Freud who decades earlier, in a letter to Ein- the scientific quality does not concern what is stein11, had spoken about Eros. dealt with but rather, how it is done. Freud’s Fromm’s point of view is completely differ- theories about love change over time: in his ent. The Freudian Eros is a late construction treatises on „Metapsychology“ (1915)7 love is an which only at a distance can suggest something affect contained in the instinct theory.