Coexist eternally? Today, an emerging belief is that all paths, all religions, lead to the same place. Everyone takes their own way that satisfies and works for them, but in the end all will be together in a perfect realm. While this may sound appealing and nice in contrast to the totalitarian view, meaning one truth, it is impossible for this to work. In St. Germain’s play, Freud’s Last Session,” Freud and Lewis both make absolute truth claims that completely contradict each other. It is impossible for these exclusive claims to both be true, and they clearly end in entirely different places. While both men make compelling arguments, Lewis’ argument of moral codes proves to be the most dangerous and strongest argument. Lewis makes many compelling …show more content…
Freud’s most compelling argument, or question rather, asks why evil and pain exist if this so called “good God” exists also. Both Freud and Lewis had lives filled with loss and hardships making it easy for Freud to ask Lewis why? Freud argues, “And if good is to be chosen then your god who created it also created evil. Allowed Lucifer to live, to flourish, even to compete with him, when logically he should have been destroyed”(33). As a Christian Lewis believes God is good, so His allowance of pain and suffering seems to contradict that goodness, and often causes even Christians to question and doubt God. Lewis quickly replies saying that suffering is the fault of man as God has given man free-will, and through his choices man has brought about all this pain. Freud brings the argument to a more personal level: “Is that your excuse for pain and suffering? Did I bring about my own cancer? Or is killing me God’s revenge?”(33). Hesitating, Lewis humbly states that he does not know. The problem of evil is something both men are emotionally involved in making it the most difficult question they discuss. The existence of suffering is dangerous to Lewis because he believes that there is a God and that He is good. Lewis admits that he struggles with this daily and even questions his own view of God: “If God is good, He would make his creatures perfectly happy. But we aren’t. So God lacks either goodness, or power, or both”(34). The state of man on earth and the state a good God would put man in are polar opposites. This reality causes Lewis to question his beliefs about God’s character and even doubt that a God exists in the first place, making this argument of Freud’s the most dangerous to Lewis’ Christian, theistic,
If God is powerful and loving the humankind, then why does He permit evil as well as suffering in this world? Various answers had been offered by many Christian philosophers and many victims of suffering, but there was not a lucid answer that could settle this argument permanently. God uses malicious acts of this world to rise up His own people and remind them that there is an opportunity that they can posses their eternal life. Literature, especially biblical literature has exploited this biblical nature to its fullest in various types of forms, including the play J.B. by Archibald MacLeish. In the play J.B, Archibald MacLeish reanimates and modernizes elements taken from the story of Job to come up with his own response to the ultimate question which has been asked by countless generations, “Why do the righteous suffer?” Throughout the play, Archibald MacLeish delineates the sudden corruption of J.B and his family, his calmness despite the helpless pieces of advice from the Three Comforters, and his unusual ending in order for God to test if one’s will and faith are strong enough to rebuild oneself after an irrational decadence.
The problem of evil is a difficult objection to contend with for theists. Indeed, major crises of faith can occur after observing or experiencing the wide variety and depths of suffering in the world. It also stands that these “evils” of suffering call into question the existence of an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God of the Judeo-Christian tradition. The “greater good defense” tries to account for some of the issues presented, but still has flaws of its own.
However, in Civilization and its Discontents, Sigmund Freud wholeheartedly takes an abstract and philosophical approach to explaining the misery of humans. To Freud, misery has always been a part of the human experience. Indeed, he makes the conclusion that suffering has been caused by three forces since the dawn of humanity: the decay of the mortal body, nature, and relationships with others (Freud 44). Freud states that human interaction is often disregarded as a cause of human suffering, yet to him it seems to cause the most pain out of the three. In the novel, Freud goes on to explain that civilization was created to reduce and mitigate the suffering caused by nature and the mortal body, while ignoring the suffering caused by human interaction. Seeing as humans still suffer as they always have, Freud comes to the “astonishing conclusion that civilization itself is the primary cause of human suffering (58). He and others have come to this conclusion through observing the victory of Christianity over pagan religions (as Christianity places low value on earthly life), the conquering of content native peoples by Europeans, and the development of
After reviewing the work of David Hume, the idea of a God existing in a world filled with so much pain and suffering is not so hard to understand. Humes’ work highlights some interesting points which allowed me to reach the conclusion that suffering is perhaps a part of God’s divine plan for humans. Our morals and values allow us to operate and live our daily lives in conjunction with a set of standards that help us to better understand our world around us and essentially allows us to better prepare for the potential life after life. For each and every day we get closer to our impending deaths and possibly closer to meeting the grand orchestrator of our universe.
A second and stronger objection to Mackie’s version of the problem of evil is explained to us using the terms 1st and 2nd order goods and evils. 1st order goods/evils are purely physical. Examples are pleasure and pain, happiness and misery. It is claimed by many theists that 1st order evils such as pain and suffering are necessary for 2nd order goods like courage and charity. However there exists what Mackie calls a “fatal objection” to this claim and that is that along with 2nd order goods there must also exist 2nd order evil...
I believe that in Lewis’s view people reject God because of the choices that they make, for some it is by their actions, others it is self-fulfillment, but for all it is their choice of how they interact with God. People reject God when they choose to remain separate from God instead of fully embracing a life with God. Lewis introduces us to many ghosts who make decisions resisting heaven and returning to hell. They get stuck in their decisions because they are lost, for one reason or another; they are unable to completely and fully accept God in their lives. They believe it is easier, “better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.” (71 ) Lewis explains “There is always something they prefer to joy” (71). We are introduced
Despite its prevalence, suffering is always seen an intrusion, a personal attack on its victims. However, without its presence, there would never be anyway to differentiate between happiness and sadness, nor good and evil. It is encoded into the daily lives people lead, and cannot be avoided, much like the prophecies described in Antigone. Upon finding out that he’d murdered his father and married his mother,
Years before I become a Christian, I was convinced that the Christian God was not good, and could not possibly exist on account of it. I remember, very clearly, saying to a friend of mine, “if God loves his children so much, how could he send them to hell?” I could not comprehend there being that kind of darkness within the world. I could not wrap my mind around hell, or the fact that mankind could have done anything to deserve such a fate. Some recent comments by atheist and agnostic friends of mine are echoes of my past thoughts: “People who don’t hear the gospel go to hell? That’s just not fair,” along with, “if God is real, then he must be evil, because the world is so screwed up.” It is hard for people to reconcile a perfectly good God
Similar to Marx, Freud believes humans simply make up the idea of God in explanation to things science could not disprove. Humans take relationships from our Earthly fathers and compare it to our Heavenly father. According to Freud, “Religion is an attempt to master the sensory world in which we are situated by means of the wishful world which we have developed within us as a result of biological and psychological necessities.” (H/R,p.26) Science can neither prove or disprove religion. Freud chooses to believe science and claims religion is only comforting and hopeful thinking to our purpose after
These arguments made by Berish and Job boil down to the question the theodicy, “why do good people suffer? Where is God in all this? Where is justice” (Fox 173). Elie Wiesel provides an answer that parallels once again with the book of Job. Embodied in the character of Sam, who claims that suffering is, “all because of our sins” (Wiesel 134). Similarly Jobs friends give a similar answer to the theodicy question by saying, “Think now, who that was innocent ever perished? Or where were the upright cut off? As I have seen, those who plow iniquity and sow trouble reap the same” (Job 4:7). The answer to the theodicy question in t The Trial of God is that suffering occurs because of the sins committed by individuals.
and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32) Freud’s perspective in this theory is very
“Reality never presents us with an absolutely unavoidable ‘either-or’; that, granted skill and patience and (above all) time enough, some way of embracing both alternatives can always be found” (Preface:VII). Lewis suggests here that time if spent right can bring us to self-realization of our journey, and in effect influence our choices. These choices are dependent on time. As wrong choices are made only in time, no truly rational choices can be made will out of the realm of time. Time is the evil that surrounds us. It is the letting go of this time when we truly feel void of problems. Only by letting go of our problems we will be able to communicate with God, while in the essence of being one with ourselves and finding our true inner self.
The concept of suffering plays an important role in Christianity, regarding such matters as moral conduct, spiritual advancement and ultimate destiny. Indeed an emphasis on suffering pervades the Gospel of Mark where, it can be argued, we are shown how to "journey through suffering" (Ditzel 2001) in the image of the "Suffering Son of Man" (Mark 8:32), Jesus Christ. Although theologians have suggested that Mark was written to strengthen the resolve of the early Christian community (Halpern 2002, Mayerfeld 2005), the underlying moral is not lost on a modern reader grappling with multifarious challenges regarding faith in the face of suffering. In his article "A Christian Response to Suffering", William Marravee (1987) describes suffering as an "experience over which we men and women continue to stumble and fall". The way we view God is crucial to the way we view suffering according to Marravee, who delineates the disparity between a view of God as an ‘outsider’ and the biblical image of God – where God is an ‘insider’ who suffers with us in our struggle. This essay seeks to explain the Christian view of suffering and the purpose suffering can have in our lives.
Goodwin, A. (1998). Freud and Erikson: Their Contributions to the Psychology of God-Image Formation. Pastoral Psychology, 47(2), 97-117. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
The Bible describes us as tripartite beings made up of spirit, soul, and body (1 Thessalonians 5:23). In a rough, imperfect way, the spirit corresponds to Freud’s Superego; the soul to the Ego; and the body to the Id. The Bible also unveils a struggle between spirit and body (aka Superego and Id if you will) best illustrated by Paul in Romans 7. However, Freud and the Bible part ways in the diagnosis and prescription for humanity’s internal conflict. Where Freud perceives human beings as completely physical in their makeup, the Bible presents man as part physical, part spiritual. While both agree that the body’s desires are in and of themselves amoral, the Bible contends that a spiritual being should not be directed by fleshly impulses. In short, Freud sides with the Id over the Superego while the Bible sides with the spirit over the body” (Wade). The Bible soundly disagrees. Behavior lies at heart of humanity’s disease. Guilt is created when one violates their standards by following what they want to do instead of what they ought to do. The Bible prescribes confession and repentance as the solution. A person is healed when they acknowledge wrongdoing, accept responsibility, and commit to change”