I was once deeply enthralled by Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and the Surrealist movement. I was convinced that their explorations of the unconscious, dreams, and symbolism revealed profound truths about human nature. These figures had a charismatic allure which drew me into their ideology. To study their ideas as a young person made me feel enlightened.
I was enthralled by the nostalgia of the legendary meetings, for example, Freud with his “Wednesday Psychological Society” meetings. These gatherings were exclusive, an inner-circle of intellectual elitism. Jung, who once looked up to Freud, eventually broke away and developed his own concepts, like that of the collective unconscious and universal archetypes. And then there were the surrealists who’d meet in ritzy Paris cafes to re-interpret the work of both men through an artistic lens. I longed to have a similar experience of belonging to a special group and being fully enlightened. However, my journey eventually led me to realize that much of what I had believed was grounded more in pseudoscience than in empirical reality. This is my story of moving from fascination to critical skepticism.
The Cult-like Allure of Freud and Jung
- Freud's Theories: Freud positioned himself as a revolutionary thinker, unveiling the secrets of the unconscious. His ideas on dreams, repression, and the Oedipus complex may appear to offer deep insights into human behaviour. In the echo chamber of Freud’s circle of followers, often referred to as the "Freudian orthodoxy," he was seen as a near-prophetic figure, and dissenting views were often marginalised or outright dismissed. His followers were expected to adhere strictly to his views, creating a rigid, dogmatic community around his ideas.
As an adult with more research behind me, I’ve also come to relise Freud’s theories were not revolutionary at all. One of his university lecturers, Franz Brentano, introduced Freud to Aristotle’s writings. This influence in Freud’s theories can be identified through similar ideas about dream interpretations being presented by both. Additionally both men defined the psyche as having three primary parts: Freud called these the “I”, the “super I”, and “it”, better known in English as “ego” (which is “I” in Latin and Greek), “superego”, and “id” (a variation of the Latin “it”). Similarly, Aristotle followed the standard academic theories of his time, that being that the psyche consisted of a rational soul (description of which are similar to Freud’s superego), irrational soul (comparable to Freud’s id), and one’s overall identity (comparable to Freud’s description of the ego).
Freud’s re-hashing of the ancient Greeks (and Romans) can be further identified in his theories of the Oedipus Complex and Narcissism (both derived from Greco-Roman mythology).
I know hold the view that Freud was not in the least bit original. Rather, he repackaged Ancient Philosophers ideas, and in doing so, fashioned himself as a charismatic leader of a cult-like ideology.
- Jung’s Mysticism: Jung, developed his own system filled with rich symbolism and a quasi-spiritual dimension. His concepts of the collective unconscious and archetypes suggested a universal, almost mystical, human experience. Jung’s followers, like the Freudians, often treated his teachings with a near-religious reverence. His theories on individuation and the exploration of the self through archetypes fostered a devoted following, eager to delve into the depths of their own psyches under Jung’s guidance.
On the whole, Jung’s research is, in my opinion, more sound than Freud’s. Jung conducted extensive research into ancient belief systems and was able to connect some underlying themes. However, I believe Jung went to far in suggesting these similarities pointed towards so-called universal based on archetypes. While many ancient belief systems do share some similarities, context and variation needs more attention than Jungian archetypes offer. His generalisations do not give credit to just how creative and imaginative humans can be in their storytelling. Moreover, symbols for example a bear, fire, or birds, do not mean the same thing in all contexts or customs.
The Cult of Surrealism
Surrealism, heavily influenced by the ideas of Freud and Jung, fostered its own brand of cult-like devotion:
- Surrealist Manifesto: Led by André Breton, Surrealism was not just an art movement but a revolutionary ideology. Breton’s "Surrealist Manifesto" was treated as a guiding scripture, dictating the movement’s principles and artistic methods. Members of the Surrealist group were expected to adhere to these principles, often to the exclusion of personal or differing interpretations.
- Exclusive Circle: The Surrealists formed an exclusive circle, bound by a shared commitment to exploring and expressing the unconscious. Breton, much like Freud, maintained a strict control over the movement’s direction and membership, expelling those who did not conform to his vision. This created an insular, almost sect-like community focused on the ideals of Surrealism.
My most revered of all was Salvador Dalí, the Eccentric Genius of Surrealism. Dalí, was one of the most iconic figures of the Surrealist movement, epitomized the fusion of art and psychoanalysis. Deeply influenced by the works of Freud and Jung, Dalí's paintings often delved into the bizarre and the fantastical, exploring the depths of the human unconscious. His fascination with Freud’s theories is evident in his famous work, "The Persistence of Memory," where the melting clocks symbolize the fluidity and distortions of time, akin to dream experiences analyzed in Freudian psychoanalysis. Dalí even visited Freud in 1938, seeking validation for his artistic explorations into the subconscious.
Jung’s concepts of archetypes and the collective unconscious resonated with Dalí, who incorporated recurring symbolic motifs like crutches, ants, and eggs into his art, reflecting universal themes and psychological archetypes. Through his art and eccentricity, Dalí became a living embodiment of the Surrealist ideal, blurring the lines between dream and reality, and challenging conventional perceptions of both art and the human mind.
I once looked to all of these men as being smart and insightful. As a budding young artist, I wanted to be like them. I wanted to fill my mind with secrets of how the mind worked and reflect that on canvas. I often found lost in daydreams, my thoughts circling around the idea of hanging out with like-minded people, an inner circle like Freud, Jung, and the Surrealists all had. Even once I was long beyond the age of such career fantasies, the romantic imagine I had of my idols lingered in the corners of my mind.
The Realisation
Despite the allure, I did began to see the limitations and the cult-like nature of these movements:
- Freud’s Questionable Science: Many of Freud’s theories, though captivating, lacked empirical support. His methods and conclusions often seemed more speculative than scientifically validated. The rigid adherence to his doctrines by his followers stifled open scientific inquiry and critical debate.
- Jung’s Mysticism: Jung’s ideas, though deeply appealing, lacked a solid empirical foundation. The notion of a collective unconscious filled with universal symbols was fascinating but ultimately unprovable. More to the point, when I researched art and religious history, my findings contradicted Jung’s. It became apparent to me that his followers had a tendency to treat his writings as almost sacred texts rather than giving them due scientific scrutiny.
- Surrealism’s Artistic License: The Surrealist movement, while creatively groundbreaking, used psychoanalytic ideas as tools for artistic exploration rather than empirical truths. The movement’s insular and dogmatic nature often mirrored the devotion seen in Freud’s and Jung’s circles.
Embracing Science and Critical Thinking
My shift in perspective led me to a more evidence-based approach to understanding the human mind and behaviour:
- Empirical Evidence: Modern psychology emphasises evidence-based practices and empirical research. Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), for example, offers effective treatments grounded in scientific validation, focusing on current thoughts and behaviours rather than speculative theories about the unconscious. CBT has a good “cult” following of its own but thanks to academic rigor it’s not the be all and end all of therapies. Things like Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Dialectical Behavioural Therapy (DBT), and trauma-informed approaches also have secure places in empirical based approaches to understanding the mind and behaviour.
- Neuroscience Advances: Advances in neuroscience provide clear, tangible insights into brain function and behavior, offering more reliable tools to understand and treat psychological issues. This scientific approach contrasts sharply with the speculative and often untestable theories proposed by Freud and Jung.
- Rational Inquiry: Embracing skepticism and critical thinking has been liberating. Instead of accepting theories based on their emotional or intellectual appeal, I now prioritise those supported by solid evidence and rigorous scientific methodology. This shift has allowed me to appreciate the cultural and historical significance of Freud, Jung, and the Surrealists without subscribing to their more dogmatic or unsubstantiated claims.
Conclusion
Freud, Jung, and the Surrealist movement played crucial roles in shaping modern thought and culture. Their explorations into the unconscious and the artistic realms they inspired were revolutionary. However, recognising their limitations and the cult-like behaviours surrounding their ideas has been a crucial step in my intellectual journey. Embracing a more critical and evidence-based approach has provided a clearer and more reliable path to understanding human behaviour. While I still appreciate their contributions from a historical and cultural perspective, I now view them through a more discerning and scientifically informed lens.
Comments