Refine
Document Type
- Articles (54)
- Books (6)
- Dissertations (1)
- Interviews (1)
- Reviews (1)
Year of publication
- 2024 (63) (remove)
This paper explores Erich Fromm’s concept of humanism, arguing that it provides us with a unified theory for both clinical work as well as social criticism. Fromm’s humanistic ideas are rooted in a structure of thought that sees our existence, our ontology as human beings, as constituted by our inherent capacities for both relatedness as well as positing ends and purposes in the world. By cultivating a self-awareness of these dual capacities, we can achieve a state of freedom, a self-consciousness of our capacity to shape our reality as opposed to conforming ourselves to it. In this way, Fromm’s ideas constitute a critical humanism that can be realized in the world via self- and social transformation and not merely an abstract set of principles or concepts.
Nach diesem (eklektisch bleibenden) ideengeschichtlichen Überblick widmet sich das folgende Kapitel der Frage, wie ein humanistischer Produktivitätsbegriff aussehen könnte, der das Subjekt und dessen Selbst- und Weltbezug ins Zentrum stellt. Zu diesem Zweck soll in Kapitel drei auf die Theorien Erich Fromms und Hartmut Rosas zurückgegriffen werden, bevor in Kapitel vier Kriterien für einen humanistischen Produktivitätsbegriff definiert werden. Der Auswahl der Autoren liegt die These zugrunde, dass beide die Frage nach produktiver Selbstwerdung neu stellen und diese an der lebensweltlichen Erfahrung spiegeln.
This article examines Fromm’s 1935 paper, >The Social Determinants of Psychoanalytic Therapy,< situating it in the context of Fromm’s life and setting forth its contrast between Freud’s >authoritarian, patricentric attitude< and the >humane, philanthropic attitude< of Ferenczi, who was deeply influenced by Groddeck. Despite critiquing Fromm’s tendency to give insufficient attention to the >the individual fate of the person,< such as would be necessary to explain the differences between Freud and Ferenczi, in expounding his concept of the >social character,< the present paper argues that Fromm’s >calling card,< published while Freud was still alive, is >one of the greatest papers in the psychoanalytic literature.<
Humanism has been criticized as a philosophical and political stance from different points of view in recent decades. The paper summarizes four common types of criticism, stemming from political, ethical, technological, and ecological concerns. These criticisms relate back to a preoccupation with the respect for otherness or difference, either toward human or non-human beings. The paper tries to demonstrate that these concerns are also to be found as essential elements in the development of humanism itself, not only among its political and theoretical opponents. It does so with reference to Erich Fromm’s works, where a life-oriented ethics is coupled with a demand for sustained political relatedness to difference, without giving up notions of a radical humanism and the anthropology that accompanies it.
In 1950, sociologist David Riesman published a best-selling book entitled The lonely crowd: A study of the changing American character. Famously, he described the ascendant >other directed< person as being haunted by an inner loneliness. This paper seeks to explain the current phenomenon of the cyber mob, an online crowd of peers gathered together to intimidate and >cancel<” others, as a form of group behavior founded in profound aloneness and alienation brought about by neoliberal society. While the existence of online groups or mobs is overdetermined, the desire to belong, to feel a part of something larger than oneself, and to escape a haunting inner loneliness may be the twenty-first-century corollary of what Reisman described 73 years ago. With the rise of authoritarianism throughout the world, climate change, massive inequality, pandemic, and the breakdown of moral authority, people on both the Left and the Right cling to cyber mobs to escape aloneness, discharge fear and rage, and acquire affirmation and acceptance through >likes< and >retweets.< While they seem to provide bonding and empowerment, what cyber mobs offer in truth is greater ferocious tribalism and the further undoing of social bonds, fellow feeling, and the remnants of civil society.
Today, a plague of certitude is spreading within American psychoanalysis. This socially constructed virus is increasingly dominating our unmoderated list serves, appearing in our journals, and slowly seeping into our institutes. Having transcended the objectivism of traditional Freudian analysis, we seem to be revivifying its spirit. Rigorous claims to truth, superior knowledge, and contempt for those not in agreement abound. The life and work of psychoanalyst and sociologist Erich Fromm is offered as an antidote and model for resistance to this plague. He consistently objected to all forms of authoritarianism, from the Right and the Left. As a radical humanist he viewed us all as responsible selves, not mere vessels for instinctual drives or victims of unbearable circumstances. As Paul Roazan said about Fromm: >It still seems to me remarkable how he was willing to stand up for what he believed in. He should be a model of independence and autonomy for us all.<
Genus, Sexus, Gender. Zum Zusammenhang von grammatischer, biologischer und sozialer Kategorisierung
(2024)
The current political climate is marked by polarization, which presents new difficulties for psychoanalysis. Erich Fromm, as a Freudian theorist and clinician, is uniquely positioned to address these issues. Fromm is a politically radical thinker who can help psychoanalysis think about society and social injustice beyond the clinical context while avoiding the dangers of excessively orthodox left-wing thinking that risks taking the field away from its core mission. Fromm can help psychoanalysis avoid what we are calling the >Peterson problem,< which is partly the result of provocative and extreme ideas in institutions and psychoanalytic publications that create reputational problems for the field. The >Peterson problem< brings new attention to the political bias of left-liberal authoritarians inside the profession, who focus on changing society rather than healing individuals and neglect audiences outside the liberal university and highly educated classes and thus create space for polarizing figures like psychologist Jordan Peterson to fill the gap. Peterson’s fame and influence serves as a lightning rod for the wider critique of left leaning political and cultural currents in psychoanalysis. Fromm can act as a role model as well as provide the intellectual resources for responding to these challenges.
Erich Fromm offered two key psychoanalytic concepts that bridge the psychic and the social: social unconscious and social character. In his view, these concepts are not only critical for understanding socio-historical phenomena but also ought to inform psychoanalytic clinical practice such that it might resist unconsciously encouraging patients to adapt to inequitable social conditions. This essay pays tribute to Fromm’s thinking while elaborating some of the differences between Fromm’s understanding of social unconscious/social character and my own. I argue that >social unconscious< does not quite capture the dynamic and conflictual nature of unconscious process, the ongoing conflict that social demands for conformity create in subject formation. To address that conflict, I propose the bridging concept of normative unconscious processes, processes that are always in conflict with counter-normative resistances. Points of both conflict and dissociation are precisely where analysts can challenge the psychic effects of oppressive social norms. Further, while agreeing with Fromm that analyzing social character ought to be central to clinical work, I argue that various and overlapping systemic oppressions – e.g. racism, heterosexism, classism – create, in any given society, multiple social characters and not just one dominant type. In agreement with Fromm’s argument that analysts themselves need to reckon with their own social character, I stress the importance for all of us to be as aware as possible of our own identity investments and social locations within unequal and overlapping power hierarchies.
Grenzbewusstsein – zwischen Abgrenzung und EntgrenzungDramatische, Lengerich (Pabst) 2024, 182 pp.
(2024)
Dramatische oder schleichende Grenzveränderungen prägen unsere Zeit - als Verletzungen, Risiken, Herausforderungen, Chancen und nicht zuletzt in der Dimension von Spiritualität. Autorinnen und Autoren aus humanwissenschaft-lichen Disziplinen berichten aus sensiblen Grenzregionen Erfahrungen und Re-flexionen: Kirche, Beruf, Jugendhilfe, Pädagogik, Psychotherapie, Sexualität, Sadomasochismus, Macht. Die Essays, empirisch fundiert, folgen der Ambiguität der Themen und verzichten auf kurzschlüssige Konventionen.
>I shall not hate.< This sentence ends the production at the Staatsschauspiel Dresden about Izzeldin Abuelaish’s biography, who lost three of his daughters in the violent conflict between Israel and Palestine. This particular attitude within a crisis situation becomes the starting point and framework of a teaching unit in which the students deal with the following questions: What is hate? Is it possible not to hate? How can hate be classified in the field of tension between the instinctual nature of human beings and a conscious attitude? How are crises and loss of orientation related to hate? Can a society be sick? How are Izzeldin’s attitude and Fromm’s theory of a productive character orientation connected and how is Izzeldin’s or Fromm’s offer of orientation to be judged against the background of crises and conflicts in the students’ lifeworld? Through a visit to a performance as well as theatre pedagogical forms of work, an access to this complex thematic field will be created.
The Psychology of Collective Narcissism is a ground-breaking text that presents a new theory of collective narcissism, a belief that exaggerated greatness of one’s own group should be but is not sufficiently appreciated by others. The book presents this concept against the background of social identity theory and research. It explores antecedent as well as social and political consequences of collective narcissism. The author discusses how this burgeoning theory and research can help to elucidate a wide range of psychological dynamics involved in pressing societal issues, such as the declining appeal of democracy, increasing populism, decreasing social solidarity, increasing societal polarization and prejudice, intergroup hostility and political violence, social inequality, and fake news and belief in conspiracy theories. Also referring to societal problems exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, this highly topical work explores socially shared beliefs as risk factors when predicting responses to crises and highlights conditions in which collective narcissism can be expected. The author also reviews research on interventions reducing the link between collective narcissism, prejudice, and retaliatory intergroup hostility focusing on her recent research on mindfulness. This is a valuable read for academics and students in psychology and the social sciences, those interested in societal processes as well as professionals dealing with the impact of collective narcissism.
Intergroup aggression occurs in many animal species but warfare has no clear non-human analogues. Among the features distinguishing war is that despite its obvious disadvantages and horrors, war enjoys enormous psychological appeal, illustrated by its entertainment value. The enjoyment of war presents a challenge for explanatory models, which range from adaptive scenarios in evolutionary paradigms to social learning and psychological drive theories. Further problems arise from findings in ethnography and archaeology. Among mobile hunter-gatherers who led traditional lifestyles, warfare was less common in socially non-complex contexts and, arguably, warfare was absent where people were routinely naked. In prehistory, warfare may be limited to the recent evolutionary past. A speculative formulation is outlined, positing a contributary role for sublimation, as a psychological effect of clothing. The proposed role of sublimation in the enjoyment of war allows for a more nuanced perspective on archaeological, ethnographic, and phenomenological evidence, suggesting warfare is not necessarily synonymous with intergroup aggression and its enjoyment could be contingent on the routine presence of clothing.
The paper analyzes right-wing populism according to Erich Fromm’s socialpsychoanalytic approach and using his social-characterological insights on authoritarianism and narcissism. Right-wing populism can be explained much more plausibly if it is understood as an expression of a reactive narcissistic identity construction rather than as a return of fascism and authoritarianism.
Obituary for Adolf Lissauer
(2024)
Where Does the Way Lead to?
(2024)
Rabbi Nobel as Youth Leader
(2024)
Should We Hate Hitler?
(2024)
Humanity is in crisis, and has been accelerating toward its own destruction. This is evident in: apathy toward climate change and the extinction of several species; the repetitive cycle of genocide and war; and the prevalence of nationalism, fascism, and xenophobia. As a citizen of the United States, I apply Erich Fromm's concepts of mature love, capitalism, alienation, the necrophilic character orientation, and insanity to the ailments plaguing the US, including: (1) white supremacy; (2) the systemic oppression of Black and Brown people; (3) legislation against women and LGBTQ and people; and (4) anti-maskers and science deniers. I also provide a critique of the noxious effects of capitalism. Fromm's ideas suggest these problems are a reflection of our collective failure to overcome our separateness through mature love, and are a byproduct of destructive, compensatory defenses that further our alienation and deadness. Fromm describes humanity as being in its psychological nascence, and defines being fully born as being a complete, integrated individual who is capable of self-love and of loving all other living beings. To correct our current trajectory, we need only apply Fromm's work in order to not compulsively repeat our tragic history in a tumultuous struggle to be born.
This article addresses the place of society in Erich Fromm's pioneering psychoanalytic work and in the evolution of interpersonal theory and practice. It suggests that there is much to be gained from a re-examination of Fromm's politically progressive perspective. By bridging sociology and psychoanalysis, Fromm developed a new approach known as >social psychoanalysis,< which sought to explain and understand the centrality of society in human experience and the therapeutic process. Fromm moved beyond Freud and found an ally in the American psychiatrist Harry Stack Sullivan. Together, Fromm and Sullivan became the key founders of the Interpersonal School of Psychoanalysis located at the William Alanson White Institute in New York. Despite their commonalities, however, Fromm and Sullivan differed in central areas, particularly on the issue of “adaptation” to society. Sullivan believed that adaptation was a marker of successful personality development and Fromm maintained that society inscribed pathology into the human being. This difference would prove definitive as interpersonal psychoanalysis moved from its radical beginnings to become a dominant school of contemporary psychoanalysis that focused on the interpersonal dyad and the interactions between the analyst and patient.