Freud thinks human beings can never be happy for a number of reasons. Unhappiness is a peculiar feeling that is present in millions of individuals around the world. It is a feeling that has no limit and is subjective. Freud says that it is not easy to deal with the feelings scientifically. He says that the feeling is oceanic, and it is an intellectual perception present in every other human being. It is not possible to enter into people’s minds that have the feeling to be able to understand it and thus, we cannot tell if the feeling is correctly interpreted. Freud argues that we are very certain of the feeling of our ego and ourselves. The appearance of the ego is deceptive since individuals tend to use it to designate an Id that serves as a façade. The ego does not make demarcations in matters concerning love. The individual’s ego feeling is subject to disturbances since the boundaries are not constant. Freud says that an individual’s ego cannot be the same from the beginning and that it must have gone through development from infancy. Freud suggests that when an infant develops an ego and experiences an object that is set against the ego, and it exists outside the ego and only appears after a special action. The outside world in an infant is experienced when it experiences unavoidable painful sensations. Some sufferings that an individual seeks to expel, turn out to be part of the ego (Freud 1961).
Moreover, by deliberate direction of the sensory activities individuals can make differences between the internal and external world. The differentiation between the internal and the external objects serves as a purpose to enable individuals to defend themselves against painful sensations that may be felt internally or externally. Freud assumes that in some people, the primary ego feeling may have persisted to a lesser degree or a greater degree and thus it is true that the oceanic feeling exists in every individual. The oceanic feeling is the origin of religious needs and is prolonged from infancy where a child needs the father’s protection. In short, Freud suggests that human beings cannot be happy because of the existing conflict between pleasure and reality.
Consequently, Freud says that the purpose of life is only answered by religion, and thus happiness is difficult to maintain. The idea of life having its purpose, therefore, falls under the religious system. Freud questions on what human beings do to show their intention of life and its purpose. According to him, human beings strive for happiness, and they want to become happy and remain happy. Freud says that when individuals strive to be happy, they aim to be with an absence of pain and un-pleasure and to experience a lot of pleasure. Freud says that happiness relates to experiencing strong feelings of pleasure but not in the absence of pain. Therefore, the program of becoming happy and remaining happy is the program of the pleasure principle. The pleasure principle has its success but is at loggerheads with macrocosm, microcosm, and the entire world. Freud further says that the intention of man to be happy was not in the creation plan. According to him, happiness comes from a satisfaction of needs that are in demand at a high degree. When a desired situation is prolonged, it produces a feeling of mild contentment since individuals can derive enjoyment from s contrast. He adds that human beings happiness possibilities are restricted by their constitution (Carlin 2012).
Therefore, it is easy to experience unhappiness than happiness since human beings are threatened by their body suffering. The suffering comes from the external world and relationships with each other. Such sufferings are the most painful since they are not evitable by any chance. With the given possibilities of suffering, individuals tend to moderate their claims to happiness in a similar way that pleasure principle changes into a reality principle. Human beings tend to think they are happy because they escaped unhappiness or because they have survived a suffering. The task of avoiding suffering pushes the one of obtaining pleasure. Human beings justify their ways of thinking on happiness through saying that putting enjoyment before caution ends up bringing punishment of its kind.
Freud suggests that unhappiness cannot be avoided unless individuals employ voluntary isolation. This is because suffering comes up because of human relationships, which can be avoided through isolation. Keeping away from other people will keep an individual away from relationships with other making it hard to experience suffering that comes with the relationships. Only then, can an individual experience happiness of quietness. In addition, he says if individuals use intoxications then they can remain happy. Using intoxications, individuals can influence their happiness since they withdraw the pressure of reality. He also suggests that controlling instincts can help human beings in fending off sufferings. However, it comes with a cost since the happiness feeling that is derived from satisfaction of wild instinctual impulse is more intense. Human beings could use the method of illusion and delusion to fend off suffering. Illusions disconnect with reality, and it involves an attempt to recreate a world that does not have the unbearable features. Freud concludes that the illusion and delusion method is not a reliable path to achieving happiness (Freud 1961).
Human beings’ unhappiness comes from the power of nature, which is very superior, the feebleness of the human bodies, and the relations of human beings. Nature is difficult to master nature; human beings are part of the nature and, therefore, they will always remain with a limited capacity. Human beings believe that even though they may not remove all unhappiness then they can remove some or mitigate some. The process of removing unhappiness in human beings is never complete and thus human beings are always faced with unhappiness in their lives.
Human beings have a complicated attitude towards the relationships as a source of suffering. Individuals think that suffering that comes from social interactions is not evitable. However, considering that human beings have been unsuccessful in prevention of suffering, civilization is probably the cause of the misery. Freud says that probably if human beings left civilization and got back to their primitive ways they would be much happier. He notes that the experiences individuals have with neuroses, which undermine happiness enjoyed by the civilized people, have not confirmed that abolition of the civilization demands can result to happiness. In addition, the extraordinary science advances and the technical applications have not resulted to any happiness. Freud says that the benefits of civilization cannot be ignored since communication has become easier, and medicine has lengthened lifespan. However, he concludes by questioning the need of a long life that is unhappy and full of misery (Carlin 2012).
Freud says that civilization has not brought any gain on human happiness. He relates this to the fact that civilization is the regulation of social relationships. The regulations make sense since the relationships would be subjected to control by the strongest. However, through according power to the community, members of the community restrict themselves to satisfaction possibilities. Thus, civilization imitates the preferences that individuals give in efforts to reduce suffering over enjoying strong feelings of pleasure. Civilization development is a process that can be compared to the maturation of an individual and both give preference to reducing un-pleasure to achieve pleasure and happiness.
Freud suggests that communal life of human beings has two foundations, the compulsion to work, and power of love. The compulsion to work was created by the external necessity while power of love made man to be unwilling for woman to be taken from him since she is his sex object. The woman does not want to be deprived her child. Civilization was expected to make human beings happy based on these factors, but this did not happen. Freud blames so much on love since he says that a man realized that from sexual love, he could get very strong experiences of satisfaction, and it provided him with happiness. He says that following this; man decided to seek happiness in the path of sexual relations. Therefore, man made himself a love object and exposed himself to extreme suffering should he are rejected or lose a loved one by unfaithfulness or death (Nathan, 2013).
Human beings remain unhappy because of the problem of human aggression according to Freud. Love relationships make individuals feel like they are sufficient to themselves, and they do not need a third person. However, despite the sexual satisfactions individuals do not have common work and interests. A civilized society demands that individuals love their neighbors, and this is the beginning of problems. Human beings question how this is possible, how it can be achieved, and if there is even a possibility of its achievement. Freud says the truth is that Human beings view love as something of high value and should be given only to those who deserve it. He says that men have a share of aggressiveness. In his conclusion on aggressiveness Freud says that civilization makes great sacrifices on sexuality of a man and his aggression thus making it harder for him to be happy in civilization. Every civilized human being exchanges a possibility of happiness with portions of security.
Freud views love as a major role in human beings desires to be happy. He argues that genital love is the greatest part that controls man’s happiness. From the research on happiness, I think Freud is unique on how he focuses on one key to happiness instead of several keys to happiness. Freud cautions that human beings should not choose one pathway to happiness but is quick to say that no pathway will give human beings long-lasting happiness. Freud says that all the pathways promise more than what they can actually deliver.
I support his idea that human beings are never happy because he is dubious about the notion of lasting happiness. Other researchers have written about happiness as a habit, but Freud says that it is momentary and transient. Freud associates happiness to pleasure since no matter how strong pleasure is felt it tends to be fleeting. Freud has a minimalist view on happiness. Other researchers have expansive views on happiness and insist that happiness calls for having the fewest needs (Bok 2010). Freud has an expansive view that it is unfortunate human beings have high desires for happiness but instead settle for a reduction of their suffering. Freud’s view of genital love between two people has a romantic ring, and he continues to explain how this love places man in a position to experience unhappiness.
I support Freud’s idea because he does not despise other paths to achieving happiness such as sublimation such as an artist’s joy in creating. Freud speaks on the value of work when it is motivated by libidinal energy. According to him, lasting happiness through work is an unreachable goal, and other researchers have come to the same conclusion. Understanding of happiness as a momentary and transient pleasure is important since it suggests that the existing differences between contented workers and the discontented are dependent on the levels of pleasure the workers experiences in their work (Carlin 2012). Therefore, Freud’s view on happiness gives a guideline that is helpful in cases where an individual in a job that does not give him or her any pleasure. In such a case then the individual should seek for transient pleasures by changing jobs. From Freud’s view on happiness, we are left to wonder if happiness in human beings allows them to have more advantages on daily pleasures.
Freud gives possible solutions to escape unhappiness and experience happiness. He presents the enjoyment of beauty as a possible solution. There is a perception that physical beauty plays a role in evocation of sexual feeling. This is the perception that brings suffering when one looses a genital partner through death. The anticipation of such a loss itself is a form of suffering thus bringing unhappiness in life.
I however do not support Freud’s emphasis on genital love since he portrays friendship in a poor light by comparing it to genital love. He views friendship as a libidinal connection that is attenuated. I believe that a friendship is an example of an ideal community, which humans aspire to have, but remains unrealized. Freud argues that the commandment love thy neighbor is too much to do, but I feel the commandment be loyal to your friends would be a solution and is a possibility since friendship is a reciprocal affection. In addition, Freud does not mention food as a source of unhappiness to human beings yet most individuals rank food a source of pleasure and a means of achieving temporary happiness. However according to Bok (2010) by the time Freud wrote on human being’s happiness he was in pain from an operation for cancer of the mouth. Therefore, eating for him would not have been a source of happiness. He, however, makes a distinction between ego and object to show a source of unhappiness. Consequently, he recognizes that when things go well with a man, his conscience is clear, and he lets his ego do anything but when misfortune comes, he heightens his conscience demands and punishes himself. In addition, Civilization plays a role in the realization of happiness. Freud’s point on human beings are never happy is true and from studies we see that human beings gain pleasure that brings about modicum happiness but transient.
Reference List
Bok, Sein. Exploring Happiness: From Aristotle to brain science. (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 2010).
Carlin, Nathan. One Hundred Years of Happiness: Insights and Findings from the Experts.
(Santa Barbara: Praeger, 2012).
Freud, Sigmoid. Civilization and its Discontents. (New York: W Norton, 1961).
Nathan Carlin. "Human Chances for Happiness: A Review of Freud's Civilization and Its
Discontents." Pastoral Psychology 62, no. 3 (June 2013): 271-289
