Ironically Wrong

Sigmund Freud and Friedrich Nietzsche both challenge the traditional views of religion and the purpose it serves for humanity. In Civilization and Its Discontents, Freud focuses on the narcissistic attitudes of humanity and tries to explain why humans feel the need for emotional comfort. Freud's argument is based on emotions rather than logic and uses poor psychology. In the Anti-Christ, Nietzsche focuses on religion as a way that the weak members of society can cope with their lesser lives. While Freud’s idea of religion is more emotionally comforting, Nietzsche's view presents a more logical argument. Freud uses religion as the justification for disobeying society by choosing to follow a higher power for emotional comfort and security. Nietzsche uses religion as the justification of the weak members of civilization for not being able to meet the standards set by civilization. Both philosopher’s present anti religious arguments and they both see religion as justification for not conforming to society, but their views are very different. Although both arguments are seemingly well constructed, logical arguments, they both refuse to have an unbiased opinion about religion.

Freud says that the connection one feels with religion, the “feeling of oneness” is threatening to the outer world, civilization (Freud, 11). For Freud, religion is simply the way that adults who have emotional distress can cope with loneliness. Freud views religion as the escape from the attitude of helplessness that a child can feel (Freud, 11). The driving force of religion, according to Freud, is fear. Fear of what the higher power of fate could bring to people if it so desires (Freud, 11). However, this argument is not a logical argument for finding fault in religion. It is not fear that drives sincere religion, it is faith. Freud claims the most natural part of humanity is seeking the avoidance of pain and that religion purposely goes against nature by forcing humans to give up part of their nature in lieu of religion (Freud, 16). Freud espouses that religion does not actually bring any happiness or peace, rather it just brings a sense of security because a higher power cares for one person’s soul. According to Freud’s logic, religion is narcissistic and self-centered because it places so much emphasis on individual people. However, Freud only uses emotions and his psychology to explain why humanity acts the way it does. Freud views religion as the way that humanity can find comfort for feeling lonely or outcast from civilization. With Freud’s view, religion is simply the attempt of a lonely man to feel connected to something important.

Nietzsche’s standards of ethics have no religious basis and are formed by the ideals of natural selection. Nietzsche defines what is good as the will to power, and the bad is everything that comes from weakness. Happiness, according to Nietzsche, is the feeling that a resistance is overcome (Nietzsche, 127). Immediately readers understand that Nietzsche does not follow religious virtues and he has decided that he is responsible for creating morals. Nietzsche claims religion is nothing more than imaginary effects and fiction of the weak minded (Nietzsche, 137). The idea that the weak people will perish and the strong people should help them to do so, is the basis for all of Nietzsche’s arguments. Nietzsche claims that Christianity is the weak side of living and that it is opposed to the preservation instincts of strong life and nature itself (Nietzsche, 129). However, Nietzsche does not acknowledge that religion is actually the way of life that will lead to a better world and a better state of living for all humanity. Nietzsche says life itself is simply the instinct of growth and striving for power (Nietzsche, 129), which is a life that can never be truly joyful. Although, Nietzsche claims religion takes away from the natural instinct of life (Nietzsche, 129), religion creates a sense of purpose that is lacking from the Nietzschean view of living. Nietzsche views himself above the universal ideals of goodness and he believes he is above the religious ethics of humanity. Nietzsche does not see fault in himself or in strong humanity and so he believes that religion is pointless because the idea of a higher power giving forgiveness is unnecessary.

Nietzsche’s views of ethics and morals heavily influenced Freud and his anti-religious writings. Both philosophers claimed religion violated the natural order of civilization, but they disagreed on the reason. Nietzsche states that religion was compensation for not being strong enough to conform to society. Whereas, Freud says religion is a justification for feeling out of place in civilization and seeking emotional protection. One distinction between Freud and Nietzsche is that Freud acknowledges that religion promotes feelings of happiness (Freud, 16). Nietzsche and Freud also disagree about the true purpose of life. According to Freud, the true meaning of life is to avoid pain and suffering (Freud, 16). According to Nietzsche, the purpose of life is to gain power and follow every natural instinct (Nietzsche, 150). Both philosophers agree that religion is not as important as it claims to be. However, Freud purports that while there may not be a supernatural connection, at least it gives civilization an appropriate coping mechanism (Freud, 26). Whereas, Nietzsche refuses to acknowledge any positive outcome from religion. This allows him to decide what humans desire in life and who is worthy of death.

Both arguments do have faults and personal bias influencing them. Freud never scientifically backed his assumptions and simply constructed his views off of his feelings. Nietzsche never took his own personal hatred for religion out of the picture and he was unable to keep an open mind when forming his views. When reading Freud and Nietzsche, readers are confronted with questions at the very foundation of their beliefs and it can be troubling. However, Freud and Nietzsche both left out the religious side of the arguments because they knew they could not fight it. Religion is a gift from God and its true purpose is to bring forgiveness and reconciliation to a fallen world. Nietzsche will never be able to scientifically prove that the superman can exist happily and Freud can never scientifically prove that religion is nothing more than a coping mechanism. Religion does not violate the natural state of civilization or the natural instincts of man, because God established religion for man to improve himself and his civilization. Ironically, the arguments both philosophers use against religious faith require faith in their belief systems, because they fail to be supported by science and logic.