You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Religion is a sub-rosa field of scholarship within the psychoanalytic community and this book makes a very serious attempt to discuss it openly by way of response to Freud's “Illusion” monograph. Although religion is incoherently treated in the psychoanalytic literature with no commonly agreed upon terminology, there is a need to re-examine Freud's thinking. Given the importance of the subject it is a rare pleasure to encounter an argument of religion so openly and scholarly discussed as within this fascinating book. The book is divided into 12 chapters by a widely diverse group of authors who offer an excellent mix of reviews of Freud's monograph.
Religion is an important concern for patients in therapy. It is also, we believe, an overlooked explanation for the generally hostile attitude by society toward psychoanalysis. Atheists do not lend support to psychoanalytic books devoted to the topic of religion, in the belief that to do so only encourages views that are antithetical to scientific scholarship. However, knowledge of religious belief is especially important because the vast majority of patients believe in God and consider religion highly important to their well being. Respect for those beliefs helps determine the closeness of the therapeutic relationship. In addition, the fact of Freud's atheism is the probable reason for the irrational hatred of him; and regular maligning of him in the scholastic literature; frequently by other psychoanalysts. Today, only a minority of analysts are atheists, while “believers” are steadily becoming the controlling majority. More than 60% of psychoanalysts believe in God and would thus likely harbor unfriendly feelings to Freud, because for believers the content of their belief is so closely identified with the dignity of the self. Theists tend to hold atheists in fear and contempt. To his credit Freud himself recognized that to opine on this subject would be controversial and could engender hostility to himself and to the e