Freud defined resistance more narrowly. He described it as
repressed, unconscious wishes to maintain infantile sexual fantasies, and the
childhood fear of being punished because of one’s libidinal impulses, act as
resistance to memory. These repressions cause neurotic patterns. Freud believed
the key to analyzing and overcoming resistance is transference. The patient
transfers desire and fear onto the analyst who becomes a substitute for figures
of the past. Resistance will be overcome only if the “acting out” within
analysis is interpreted and transformed into memories which can be worked
through and reintegrated into a more mature psyche. Fromm proposed a broader
concept of transference. He believed the analyst represents infantile authority,
like the mother who solves all of her child’s problems or the father who is
never satisfied with his son’s accomplishments. Instead of facing reality
independently the patient continues to transfer interpersonal struggles and
wishes. Fromm’s approach tended to strengthen this type of transference and with
it the patient’s resistance to remembering. Freud’s approach to technique could
be more democratic than Fromm’s, especially since Freud did not try to force fit
the patient into a formula. Freud did advocate rules in the doctor-patient
relationship, in part to protect himself. Freud did not like to be stared at all
day; thus the patient lies on a couch and cannot see the analyst. Fromm on the
other hand liked the humanistic face to face encounter. Sometimes his piercing
eyes would freeze the patient and his intensity could provoke defensive
reactions. Freud saw the analyst as a professional with technical training who
should have a love of truth, a broad education in the arts and sciences, and
knowledge of his own unconscious. Another subject that Fromm and Freud had
different opinions on was religion. Fromm has been described as deeply
religious, but still not believing in God. His childhood included a strong
Jewish influence, but he rejected it because he wanted no part of organized
religion. The most important aspect of religion for Fromm personally was the
hope it offered. “He praised “loving thy neighbor as thyself” as the most
important standard for living.”( Ewen 202) Fromm did contend that religion could
have harmful effects. He felt religious organizations prohibition of birth
control, could stifle healthy growth and development. He did not like the idea
of so many different religions preaching different beliefs. He preferred to
emphasize the commonness of all humanity. Freud regarded religious beliefs to be
extremely harmful to the individual and society.
“He viewed religion as a
regression to infancy, when a helpless baby needed protection of an all-powerful
parent.”( Ewen 60) He hated religious ideas such as life continues after death
and that all good is rewarded and all evil punished, that the difficulties of
life serve a higher purpose so there is no reason to despair. Freud believed
religion to be a collective neurosis started at a very early stage of
development. People are indoctrinated with religion during childhood, before
reason sets in, so they become dependent on its effects. Freud recommended
children be brought up without religion so they would learn to rely on
themselves. He thought people should not look to an ideal happiness in the
hereafter, but face the reality and burdens of life in the present. Freud has
many attacks against him, but despite these attacks he has contributed greatly
to the field of psychology and psychiatry. A lot of other personality theorists
have used Freud’s psychoanalytic theory for the foundation of their very own
work. Freud was a brilliant man, but he had a lack of tolerance for other ideas
and modern innovations and placed an overemphasis on sexuality, drive reduction,
and the biological determinants of personality. His contributions included the
importance of unconscious, dream interpretation, psychoanalytic therapy and much
more. Fromm is noted for his work in dream interpretation and totalitarianism.
His works have been praised as landmarks in psychological, political, and
philosophical thought. He provided us with theory and methods to understand
health and illness as concepts that do not refer to the individual alone, but
also the relationship of the individual to others and to social institutions. On
the other hand Fromm’s recommendations for social reform have proved to be very
controversial. He proposed radical social changes that would be hard to
implement. Many observers called his ideas unscientific and excessive. I
personally do not agree with a lot of Freud’s Theory, however I do give credit
to him for bringing important information to the field of psychology. I believe
he was an extremely smart man and has laid grounds for many to follow. Some of
the things I do agree with are psychoanalytic therapy, the importance of the
unconscious, defense mechanisms, and that neurosis can be caused in childhood,
not necessarily with sexual implications or that it is always caused in
childhood. As far as Fromm I do not believe that he is as well known or that his
theory is as important as a lot of the other theorist. I agree with Fromm in
that our parents and our environment have a lot to do with our behaviors or
causes of neurosis. I do not believe however that that is the only determinant.
I believe that it is social and biological factors that we are shaped by. I did
not like the fact that Fromm left so many doors open and was very vague.
Although I do not agree too much with Freud he did make huge contributions and
had a more thorough theory than did Fromm.
Bibliography
Ewen, Robert B. An Introduction to Theories of Personality. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Assoc., 1998. Hansen, Rossberg and Cramer. Counseling Theory and
Process. Ma: Allyn and Bacon, 1994 Maccoby, Michael. “The Two Voices of Erich
Fromm: The Prophetic and the Analytic.” Society Magazine July/August 2000.
Online. Internet: www.maccoby.com
Words: 1756
