04 Februari 2009

RELIGION: Psychology’s James And Freud Perspective

There was different view between William James and Sigmund Freud when tried to explain religion in psychology, that is, psychoanalyze and psycho humanistic.

The emergence of this opinion is consequence from different worldview when they show consciousness of men of religion. And both James end Freud put experience of religious in personal experience. And they have each reason.

For James, the consciousness of religion, however, based on personal, emotionality, and variety experience. The Third of thing that became experience of religious integrate to human itself. Therefore experiences, in limited form, can be called as relation to nominous.

Different from James, Freud show that no argumentative reason can describe to believe in God, and of course, this reason is non-rational. And then, He defined religion as obsession, and illusion.

In this case, what given by Freud actually, he didn’t feel what the meaning of personal experience like done by James in his studies. For James, the experience is true. And not it’s problem, “Is God present or no?” or “Who is God?” But “Haw to God and Religion can help people to get better life?”

In approaches for religion, James used a several theory and also critique for Freud, that is, Survival Theory. That religion must be understood as infantilism. A More, James believes that experience of religious only phenomenological indication, but he believes too for “a more”. So “a more” is beyond and overshadow superstructure established by religious system. In other word, James want to say that faith of being is right because they believe in them religion’s doctrine. This argument can help to explain faithful followers based on emotion in religion.

Tidak ada komentar:

Poskan Komentar