- Image via Wikipedia
From a Primer of Freudian Psychology by Calvin S. Hall:
Freud’s long life, from 1856 to 1939, spans one of the most creative periods in the history of science. The same year that the three-year-old Freud was taken by his family to Vienna saw the publication of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species. This book was destined to revolutionize man’s conception of man. Before Darwin, man was set apart from the rest of the animal kingdom by virtue of his having a soul. The evolutionary doctrine made man a part of nature, an animal among other animals. The acceptance of this radical view meant that the study of man could proceed along naturalistic lines. Man became an object of scientific study, no different, save in complexity, from other forms of life.
The folks conditioned by this teaching will be perfectly comfortable with that paragraph, but those of us who believe it carries world-altering errors are less sanguine. Which sentences stand out to you? Can you express why they do?
Related articles
- Evolution`s revolution was the naturalist`s, though initial idea wasn’t (physorg.com)
- How do we deal with a purposeless universe and the finality of death? (3quarksdaily.com)
- Chipping Away at the Life of the Mind (online.wsj.com)
- Freud, the Reluctant Philosopher (newstatesman.com)
