A Congregation of One
The Enigma of the Oceanic Feeling June 17, 1999 DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780195115086.003.0006 (opens in new tab)
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractThis analysis deconstructs the common understanding of Freud's views on mysticism, showing them to be more subtle, complex, and interesting than typically acknowledged. It highlights the disjointed and unfinished character of the Freud-Rolland debate, arguing that the conversation raised new questions while dispelling misleading interpretations. The authors suggest the debate could have benefited from a mediator to clarify issues and adjudicate misunderstandings, but also note that this unresolved nature presents opportunities for revisionist scholarship.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key finding | Argues that Freud's views on mysticism were more subtle, complex, and interesting than commonly acknowledged, and that the Freud-Rolland debate remains unfinished, offering opportunities for revisionist scholarship. |
Abstract
Abstract Our efforts up to this point have aimed at elucidating the issues entertained and perspectives offered by Freud and Rolland during the course of their debate on mysticism. The result has been the deconstruction of the common understanding of Freud’s views on mysticism. Certainly the latter were more subtle, complex, and interesting than has been acknowledged. At the same time attention can be drawn to the disjointed and “unfinished” character of the Freud-Rolland debate. Our analysis seems to have raised as many new questions as it dispensed with misleading interpretations. The debate could well have used a mediator who could have clatified muddled issues, adjudicated misundrstandings, and attempted to further the cause of a series of highly interesting but ultimately unresolved conversations. On the other hand, it is here where opportunity lies for anyone pursuing a revisionist agenda.