Refine
Language
- English (75) (remove)
Document Type
- Articles (75) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2018 (75) (remove)
The story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is a seminal text within the Christian tradition and is considered to hold innermost truths about human nature. From a psychological perspective, Osman argues that since the narrative of Adam and Eve is the first telling of human experience within the Bible and since similar myths exist in other cultures, this story is likely to point to >significant truths about psychic functioning.< Ellens suggests that whether we take this story at a literal, symbolic, mythical, or metaphorical level, it provides us with a framework for thinking about the human condition. Inherent in this story is a series of themes that are central to psychological theories of development such as loss, separation, dependency, intersubjectivity, vulnerability, shame, and desire. This article focuses on two competing theological interpretations of the Garden of Eden emanating from the work of the church fathers Augustine and Irenaeus and explores how the work of psychoanalysts Erich Fromm and Melanie Klein maps onto these two traditions. The author argues that the work of Klein and Fromm can serve to illuminate these different theological traditions, assist us to reflect upon questions of psychological maturity and moral development, and provide a basis for dialogue between theology and psychology in which both the full goodness and the inherent destructiveness of humanity is fully recognised.
This paper tries to outline two different ways of thinking about the concept of negative liberty. On the one hand, one can think of negative liberty in the external view that is entitled the external negative liberty in this paper. Here, human being is free if no one stops him/her from doing whatever s/he may want to do. On the other hand, one can think of negative liberty in the internal sense that is entitled the internal negative freedom by the researcher. In this view, human being realizes him/ herself as a person who exists separately from others but s/he does not have his or her own identity. For this purpose, after analyzing of two approaches through a two prominent thinkers’ standpoints including Isaiah Berlin and Erich Fromm, this question is going to be answered; what negative liberty is based on the two new perspectives, the external and internal perspectives.
Love as a core value in veterinary and medical practice: Towards a humanimal clinical ethics?
(2018)
This article represents the outcome of a dialogue between a vet and a healthcare ethicist on the theme of >love< in professional life. We focus on four types or varieties of love (eros, agape, philia and storge) in relation to the professional care of humans and animals. We discuss the relevance of Fromm’s core elements of love (care, responsibility, respect and knowledge) and consider the implications of these for human and animal health care practice. We present and respond to five arguments that might be waged against embracing love as a professional value in veterinary and medical practice. We argue that a moderated love can and should be reclaimed as a contemporary professional value. It is most helpfully contextualised within virtue ethics or care ethics. We suggest that love is a rich starting point from which to launch an exploration of an interprofessional humanimal clinical ethics.
Paolo Gerbaudo’s book >The Mask and the Flag: Populism, Citizenism and Global Protest<, whose approach is reflected in his Crosscurrents piece in the issue of >Media, Culture & Society< at hand, is a response to these societal, political and academic challenges. This Cross Currents comment asks, I ask, the following: Why is it that right-wing authoritarian populism in recent times has become much more popular than left-wing movements? How do right-wing authoritarian movements communicate? Why is it that right-wing political communication strategies seem to garner and result in mass support? The critical theory of authoritarianism advanced by the Frankfurt School and related authors on fascism, Nazism, and the authoritarian personality help us to critically analyse the communication of authoritarianism. In this context, particularly the works by Franz Leopold Neumann, Erich Fromm, Theodor W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Leo Löwenthal, and Willhelm Reich are relevant.
This paper combines historical and biographical work on the Frankfurt School of critical theorists with a sociological approach to intellectual creativity outlined in Michael Farrell’s provocative book Collaborative Circles: Friendship Dynamics and Creative Work. Revisiting earlier research on the often unheralded role the psychoanalyst Erich Fromm played in the early years of the critical theory tradition, the paper reviews the theory of collaborative circles outlined by Farrell, applies this social science explanation of conflict and creativity to the Frankfurt School network of Horkheimer, Fromm, Adorno, Marcuse, Lowenthal etc. and suggests a new way of thinking about the history of this innovative and controversial group of social theorists and researchers. The paper concludes by suggesting revisions to the Farrell model of collaborative circles and compares and contrasts the strengths of the theory to the “scientific intellectual movements” approach outlined by Frickel and Gross.
This paper presents the text of an imagined oration from a senior faculty member to a newly hired faculty member on the topic of how to stay sane in the academy. It begins by characterizing the basic problem at the heart of the university: students are not learning as much as they should and professors are not teaching them in a way that ensures they do. The problem is one of dysfunction and denial. The university is not able to effectively perform its main function and the involved stakeholders pretend everything is fine. Seen in the light of Fromm’s (1955) criteria of mental health, many aspects of modern university life are quite >insane<. I discuss three specific things to avoid that will protect the faculty member’s sanity: avoid the >unstated compact< between faculty and students, avoid the prospect of a promotion to the administration, and avoid the lure of popularity and politics. I then discuss three affirmative steps to enhance faculty mental health: consider first things, honor the call of truth in the world and your discipline, and regularly recall the deeper purpose of the university. The paper concludes with a candid analysis of why the professoriate’s public prestige has precipitously fallen over the past 40 years. (APA PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved)
Some have attempted to address the popular acceptance of irrational ideas like fascism or capitalism through various combinations of the work of Marx and different forms of psychoanalysis. Some of the better - known attempts in this regard are Erich Fromm’s humanistic psychoanalysis, Wilhelm Reich’s discussion of the role of repressed sexuality as a control mechanism, and today, the philosopher Slavoj Žižek’s explanation via Marx’s theory of commodity fetishism and Lacan’s psychoanalysis.
Building on bell hooks’ conceptualization of love as a mode of political resistance, this article explores how prisoners’ radio employs love to combat injustice. Through an examination of two prisoners’ radio projects – The Prison Show in Texas and Restorative Radio in Kentucky – I argue that incarcerated people and their loved ones appropriate the radio to perform public and revolutionary acts of love, countering the oppressive forces of mass incarceration in the United States. By unapologetically positioning their love for prisoners front and center, ordinary Americans subvert systems of oppression which mark incarcerated folks as incapable and unworthy of love. Love is an intrinsic marker of humanity, so prisoners’ radio allows the incarcerated and their advocates on the outside to actively challenge the dehumanization that people face behind bars.