Articles / Artikel
Mainstream social science has been blindsided by the rise of Trumpism and broader growth of authoritarian populism. We make the case that Frommian work is desperately needed inside the core of contemporary social science theorizing by examining social character theory up against and alongside the concept of habitus developed by French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. Both Fromm and Bourdieu were concerned with the human costs of social change and economic development, Fromm with his writings on advanced capitalism in The Sane Society (1955a) and on Mexican village life in Social Character in a Mexican Village (with Michael Maccoby, 1970b), and Bourdieu with his extended studies of peasants in Algeria during the French colonial war of the 1950s and early 1960s. We will compare and contrast the theory of social character developed in the Mexican study with Bourdieu's concept of habitus, and discuss what Fromm's ideas can add to Bourdieu-influenced critical social science.
The two dominant voices in the work of Erich FROMM, particularly in his psychoanalysis, are examined: the analytic and the prophetic. The analytic voice was skeptical and inquiring. It searched for answers to questions and did not condemn the answers received. In contrast, the prophetic voice was urgent and judgmental; condemnation rather than analysis of perverse human behavior was the result. From the analytic perspective, psychoanalysis was a vehicle for the liberation of people from fear and the realization of creative potential. From the prophetic perspective, psychoanalysis was a spiritual discipline that could tap people's social and spiritual revolutionary potential. Unfortunately, FROMM's two voices were often in disharmony. FROMM's failure to harmonize the two voices limited his ability as a therapist and created confusion about the methods and goals of psychoanalysis. D. Generoli