Feud discussed many different forms of unhappiness and desire along with primitive needs throughout the article. Freud began by discussing how civilization and society is responsible for human misery. We are constantly trying to keep up with what is wanted and acceptable by society which in return causes us unhappiness because the feeling is only temporary. If there were no societal structures or views of rights or wrong, we would not continuously have the urge to do right by society and therefore would be able to achieve happiness. Technological advances were also pointed out as a source of anguish to human happiness. The move we advance technologically in society the unhappier and disconnected we become. For example, if phones, messaging or mailing were not developed then we wouldn’t have to be so sad about a person being far away, we would have to see each other to communicate. These ideas where summarized to me with the notion that power over nature and the things we cannot control as humans will not bring us happiness but instead a lifetime of disparities. Another topic discussed was the idea of love and family relationships regarding desire and fulfillment in life. From his discussion, Freud took a sexist point of view when describing the roles of men and women in sexual relationships. Freud viewed women only as child-bearers, someone to take care of a family, he felt women were unable to maintain and carry out the workload of men. Meanwhile, Freud viewed men as head of households also the head of sexual encounters. Men were expected to provide, also he thought that men sought out sexual relationships to fill a void of love and unhappiness. Due to this, he spoke of lounge restrictions that prohibit us from truly experiencing happiness in our relationships or sexual encounters he speaks of them only as a fulfillment. Lastly Freud seemingly criticizes society’s views of religion and love. He believed that sexuality only resulted from a need to build bonds and friendships with others. He sights “love thy neighbor” as an example to state men are aggressive in nature not loving. Therefore, religion to Freud was just a universal method of regulating some forms of aggression but it cannot be prevented which again roots back to our source of unhappiness.
Personally, what I pulled from this article is that the very things that this world and society we are apart of will always be the source of our true sense of unhappiness in life. No matter how much we advance and develop and as a group, power and technology can’t fill a void that lies within our very nature. Agree with Freud in this aspect because if you think about it, technology takes us away from what is real in life. Physical interactions and conversations, daily activities such as reading or getting to work. Everything has a technological alternative to which most of us choose to make the activities of life easier but in return the authenticity of the actions or quality of interactions are stripped from us. As for love, family relationships and role dynamics I agree but disagree with Freud’s thoughts. I agree that love has become more of a fulfillment of desire rather than a genuine act towards another individual, however, while men may be aggressive in their need for love women are not. I feel as if a constant deprivation of love causes women to adopt a more loving nature because it is not being received. It also causes women to seek out forms of love in more holistic ways such as starting a family. Family dynamics were also described to be overbearing in the aspect that the mother becomes guarding and protective of the kids which prohibits them from stepping outside to experience the world and other forms of love. This starts off the deeply damaged live dynamics of humans while men become restrictive and aggressive towards love women seem to adapt to it to cope with love deprivation. As a result, the act of love to me seems to be less genuine because of the way society structures it. Also, regarding religion what I took away is that religion to Freud is a distraction from the reality of the world. How can one love thy neighbor if an understanding of what love really means was never achieved? Therefore, loving thy neighbor becomes an act of aggression or passion, both opposite of its true religious meaning. Overall, Freud made key points in this article with both modern and older views of structures of society as well as our sense of happiness in life.