Fear of Freedom and aversive strategies

[Lark]

I'm going to summarise, pretty sloppy I'd guess, one of the big ideas from one of my favourite psycho-analytical theorists here because I'd like to hear others views about whether they think its valid or not or even how it could be researched.

It's of course a theory from Erich Fromm, Fromm believed that humans have an innate drive towards freedom, for themselves and, via the medium of being biophilious if nothing has happened to you to derail you from human nature, that of others, even animals and other living things.

However, Fromm felt that being free, being conscious, was experienced by most people as terrifying or at least really challenging, either consciously or unconsciously, mostly unconsciously, but it is what sets mankind, cognitive, cerebral, thinking and reflecting, apart from animals or simpler forms of life which are just totally obedient to instinctual drives. The progressive record of human history has only made freedom more challenging. All sorts of primary bonds have disappeared, been collectively dropped, socially abandoned and in the life of any individual growing up from child to adult they have to break some primary bonds themselves in the process.

So, Fromm suggested that in dealing with the challenge and the emotional conflicts it gives rise to, with other powerful drives, the drive to relate to others for instance which Fromm felt was as big as the drive to freedom, can involve aversive strategies - authoritarianism, automaton conformity and destructiveness - Fromm explained the Nazi period in Germany as a consequence of the prevalence of authoritarianism as an aversive strategy, even Hitler was typical of this strategy, he felt himself a middle man, engaging in the "kiss up, piss down" but his superior was "God", "Nation", "Future", "Race" rather than a person.

Do you think this is a valid theory? Does it make any sense to you? Or resonate? If its invalid why? Can it be tested? Fromm supported his hypothesis with allusions, allegories and descriptions and literature review in his book Fear of Freedom but he did other research on the working class in weimer germany and the population of a mexican village which was much more comprehensive, surveys, questionnaires, interviews, rorschach etc. etc.

Could you design a study today which would vindicate or invalidate his hypothesis? Would it be worthwhile in anycase? And if you were considering it would you add any other aversive strategies for our day and age which perhaps Fromm wouldnt have thought of or couldnt have thought of?

 

[Quiet]

Yes, Absoloutely, this theory makes sense to me.

I think it is something that is clearly apparent when observing life. However, i can safely say that i know of people who would not resonate with this theory.
This theory is highly dependant on an individual's personal beliefs about self, reality, universe, and what is optimal functioning.

Designing a study to explore this would be most difficult because of the extremely subjective and indefinable nature of of all the concepts involved- freedom, connection, biophillia, emotions, thinking, conflicts, drives etc. That said, yes it could be done. I could design a study i suppose, but im not interested enough to do it. Im sure it would be worthwhile, and helpful, and i hope someone does. Generally, I feel no reason to prove concepts and theories that i resonate with to others. People believe what they do for many reasons, and i respect that. But generally speaking, i dont always appreciate the reasoning process people take, and i feel that many people lack self awareness and critical thinking ability, hold ridiculous beliefs, and are quite unhealthy and disconnected from life. But holding different beliefs and having different experience is a part of life and learning. The perspective is fascinating. Discussion and exploring ideas and perspectives is fun, entirely non threatening, and generally non-commital. Ive believed many different things along the way. But somethings we 'know', and it is irrelvant what other people believe in regards to it.

I recently read a book that successfully explored this concept in some detail called 'The nature of Personal Reality', by Jane Roberts. This book is one that many people may disregard offhand, because of their personal beliefs about the way this book was written. It was 'channeled' by an entity that describes itself as an 'energy personality essence'.

 

[sprinkles]

I think the main freedom that people are afraid of is the freedom of other people. One rarely fears their own freedom. The ones who are caught up in authoritarianism are victims of someone else's fear who are maybe lacking in some backbone. That's my opinion. I don't think this is quantifiable for legitimate study.

 

[Quiet]

I think the main freedom that people are afraid of is the freedom of other people. One rarely fears their own freedom. The ones who are caught up in authoritarianism are victims of someone else's fear who are maybe lacking in some backbone. That's my opinion. I don't think this is quantifiable for legitimate study.

Do you think being afraid of other people's freedom equates to being afraid of other people in general?

 

[sprinkles]

Do you think being afraid of other people's freedom equates to being afraid of other people in general?

It comes into play but I'm not sure how general it is. Fearing others and what others can do is a factor though.

Notice how rarely one volunteers to just give up more of their freedoms out of the blue without some overarching reason. What you almost always see is people prescribing to other people reasons why freedoms need to be taken away, and some times these people buy into the idea.