Mysticism East and West
The Enigma of the Oceanic Feeling June 17, 1999 DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780195115086.003.0007 (opens in new tab)
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractThe text argues that Freud's two interpretations of Rolland's mysticism—as regressive and defensive, or as therapeutic and adaptive—are insufficient and require expansion or replacement. New theoretical resources are needed to reinterpret Rolland's mysticism and to reconsider the broader relationship between psychoanalysis and the interdisciplinary study of mysticism.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key finding | Argues that Freud's two avenues for analyzing Rolland's mysticism must be expanded or superseded, and that new resources are needed to reinterpret mysticism and the relationship between psychoanalysis and its interdisciplinary study. |
Abstract
Abstract In order to interpretative justice to the reconstructed version of Rolland’s mysticism, it 1s clear that the two avenues of analysis suggested by Freud-one championing a view of mysticism as regressive arid defensive; the other as therapeutic and adaptive—need to be expanded and developed, if riot altogether superseded. New resources must be found to not only ground a fresh interpretation of Rolland’s mysticism but to help rethink the relationship between psychoanalysis and the interdisciplinary study of mysticism as a whole.