20.11.2012 Views

Sacred Psychoanalysis - etheses Repository - University of ...

Sacred Psychoanalysis - etheses Repository - University of ...

Sacred Psychoanalysis - etheses Repository - University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

PART A. THE CONTEXT, DEFINITION AND HISTORY OF<br />

RELIGION, SPIRITUALITY AND THE SACRED IN<br />

CONTEMPORARY PSYCHOANALYSIS<br />

CHAPTER ONE. PSYCHOANALYTIC, PERSONAL AND<br />

METHODOLOGICAL CONTEXTS<br />

No qualitative research involving the experience <strong>of</strong> the researcher emerges out <strong>of</strong> a vacuum<br />

(Denzin and Lincoln 2005). As stated in the introduction, this research has a personal<br />

motivation that is utilized as a tool with which to engage the complex areas <strong>of</strong> religion,<br />

spirituality, psychoanalysis and the sacred.<br />

1. Psychoanalytic context<br />

There is a long-held and dominant view in psychoanalysis that Freud and religion do not<br />

mix. Writing in 1961 Rieff commented ‘It is on the subject <strong>of</strong> religion that the judicious<br />

clinician grows vehement and disputatious. Against no other strong-point <strong>of</strong> the repressive<br />

culture are the reductive weapons <strong>of</strong> psycho-analysis deployed in such open hostility’<br />

(Quoted in Earle 1997: 220). Writing in 2009 Akhtar added ‘Sigmund Freud’s … unease<br />

about the transcendent “oceanic feeling” … led to a long chain <strong>of</strong> subservient<br />

psychoanalytic thinking which took Freud’s atheism at face value and regarded<br />

psychoanalysis and religion (and mysticism and spirituality) as antagonistic’ (Akhtar 2009:<br />

269), although the situation has begun to change. Any shift requires a reappraisal <strong>of</strong> Freud’s<br />

views on religion balancing his theoretical accounts <strong>of</strong> the subject (Freud 1907, 1913, 1927,<br />

1928, 1930, 1933a, 1933c, 1939) alongside his much more complex and paradoxical stance<br />

to it when linked to, and interpreted by his autobiography and his correspondence (de<br />

Mijolla 1996; Mahony, Bonomi, and Stensson 1997).<br />

7

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!