By KAREN OSERA*
If man is not master of himself, how can he be responsible before the Law? The Freudian provocation resonates in the corridors of Law, where legal zetetics finds in psychoanalysis a mirror to question not only what we judge, but how and why we judge.
The method conceived by Freud
After Nicolaus Copernicus and Charles Darwin, at the end of the 19th century, Sigmund Freud realized what he himself called the “third narcissistic wound of humanity”, the very conception of psychoanalysis. In the same way that Copernicus proved that the universe did not revolve around planet Earth, Darwin proved that human beings do not correspond to the image and likeness of God, Freud argued that psychoanalysis reveals that there are inadmissible desires that reside in the depths of human consciousness and these same desires govern human actions and not the other way around. From a contemporary perspective, it is not difficult to understand that what was hurting the individual was not his own nature, but his relationship with divinity and authority. Therefore, such a wound has a political and religious genesis that has repercussions on the way in which human beings are situated in their own reality governed by the Law (Freud, 1937).[I][1]
“Psychoanalysis is a name for a procedure for the investigation of mental processes which are almost inaccessible by any other means; a method (based on this investigation) for the treatment of neurotic disorders; and a collection of psychological information obtained along these lines and gradually accumulating into a new scientific discipline” (Freud, 1923, p.287).[ii][2] [3]
Psychoanalytic knowledge implies the subject, as Jorge Forbes says (Forbes, 2017, p. 17)[4] [iii]. Current social phenomena such as overexposure, unusual aggression, the euphoria of luxury, bioethical challenges, questioning and non-compliance with legal decisions are issues shared by both Law and Psychoanalysis. Both areas converge on the issue of human subjectivity, such as, for example, the justice sought by individuals in a society governed by the dynamism that yearns for new answers.
Freudian readings
Jacques Lacan, reader of Freud, keeps[5] the assumption that man is not the center of himself, as there is the presence of the unconscious.
“Psychoanalysis, in the order of man, really has all the characteristics of subversion and scandal that the Copernican deconcentration of the world had in the cosmic order: the earth, the abode of man, is no longer the center of the universe. The analyst would be able to see something more secret in what seems clearer to you. See, you are naked, uncovered, under an expert gaze and without knowing exactly what you are showing” (Lacan, 1957).[iv][6]
Lacan compared psychoanalysis to the impact that Copernicus' theory had on the understanding of the universe. Before the Copernican revolution, there was a belief that the earth was the center of the universe, but Copernicus demonstrated that this was not the case, decentralizing the human view of the cosmos. In psychoanalysis, Lacan argued that there is a similar decentering in relation to the subject: the "I" (ego) is not the center of psychic life, as is often believed to this day.
Just as man discovered that he was not the center of the universe, in the analysis session one discovers that one does not have complete control over the mind, and this can be disconcerting, subversive and even scandalous.
Based on the assumption that human beings are shaped according to the civilizing culture to which they belong, other authors studied and used the concepts of psychoanalysis to support their ideas, including the Freudian understanding of Justice, based on the notion of maat, explored in the work Moses and Monotheism, which will be adequately analyzed later.
Otto Rank (1926)[7] [v], saw the dynamics of rivalry between parents and children in classical authors such as Sophocles, Shakespeare, Schiller, Byron, Cervantes, Voltaire and Shelley[8] . In other words, Rank demonstrated that the Oedipal complex is not restricted to the Freudian clinic because it permeates all of Western culture.[9] “The names we are most familiar with from the series beginning with Sargon of Agade are Moses, Cyrus, and Romulus. In addition to these, however, Rank has gathered together a large number of heroic figures from literature or legend, of whom the same story of birth and youth is told, either in full or in recognizable fragments: Oedipus, Karna, Paris, Telephus, Perseus, Hercules, Gilgamesh, Amphion, Zethus, and others. Rank’s researches have made us aware of the source and purpose of this myth. It is enough for me to refer to them in brief sentences. A hero is one who has courageously rebelled against his father and finally triumphed over him” (Freud, 1937).[vi]
Other authors and readers of Freud such as Otto Gross, Paul Federn, Wilhelm Reich and Siegfried anchored in psychoanalysis the main theoretical framework supporting the idea that speech is free and that destiny is not restricted to the wild biological condition.
According to a Otto Gross (1877-1920)[10] [vii], psychoanalysis does not serve to help the individual adapt to society, but it is, above all, a powerful tool for transforming the existing order.
Like Gross, Paul Federn (1919, p.3-19) was also a reader of Freud and saw psychoanalysis as a means of making a revolution.[viii][11] In this essay, Federn stated his intention to contribute to the political analysis of the social order through psychological research. Federn argued that it is important to lay bare the psychic processes that the individual knows nothing about or knows little about, given that they remain unconscious until an effective method makes them understandable, and this method, Federn argued, is psychoanalysis as conceived by Freud.
"Subjectivity is neither measurable nor quantifiable: it is the proof, at once visible and invisible, conscious and unconscious, by which the essence of human experience is affirmed” (Roudinesco, 2000).[ix][12]
Another reader of Freud, Wilhelm Reich (1977), understood that psychoanalysis could provide means for understanding the laws, or at least part of their material substrate.[13] [X] And for this, there is another method allied to psychoanalysis: Zetetics.
In the sphere of Law, Hans Kelsen (1922) understood psychoanalysis as a tool to support a general theory of the State. On the one hand, Kelsen alleged insufficiency in the form of identifications between the members and the leader of society, while reaffirming his understanding of the State as a coercive legal organization.
On the other hand, Kelsen recognized psychoanalysis for the construction of a political theory not woven into metaphysical assumptions, as has been done elsewhere, but on anthropological bases regarding the aggressive nature of human beings, capable of legitimizing the existence of a coercive order with the purpose of repressing such aggressiveness. In short, capable of legitimizing the State itself.[14]
In this sense, Kelsen, like Federn, saw[15] the psychic tendency to anthropomorphize the state leader in the paternal image, understood democracy as a maternal society[16] , a fatherless society, because the body that is established above men is capable of imposing coercion is a conception of the individuals themselves.[17] In other words, Kelsen recognized the transformative potential of psychoanalysis as it, by showing the immanence of the State and institutions, allows us to accept the exchange and relativization of authority.
In short, Freud's readers identified the essence of psychoanalysis as an emancipatory practice of the subject in the face of civilization.
Maat and zetetics
In the context of legal sciences, Zetetics represents a method suitable for studying and understanding human subjectivity in the context of the law. This method consists of investigating the principles and premises that orbit the answers to what is being investigated through constant questioning. [18] A zetetic[19] , therefore, bears a very close resemblance to the investigative method of the unconscious developed by Freud given that the jurist's task is carried out in interpretative practice.
“Legal zetetics, in its most discriminating aspects, corresponds, as we have seen, to disciplines that, although not only having law as their object, can, however, take it as one of their main objects” (Ferraz Junior, 2002).[xi][20]
As mentioned previously, Freud's readers, in addition to finding in his texts the pillars of an emancipatory practice, saw in the Freudian method the explanation of the genesis of a coercive social order and learned about the result of an Egyptian historical investigation.[xii] about the ideal of justice, embodied by the goddess Maat.
Based on the proposal to investigate the answers to understanding the conflicts and social facts of modernity in ancient Egyptian civilization, Freud shows in Moses and Monotheism their adherence to the principles of Maat. This tendency results from two main reasons: the Freudian method itself of investigating neuroses and repressed desires through an ancient religion, with the aim of reaching the human spirit, and the transmission of monotheism, from the Pharaoh Akhenaton to the Jewish tradition, mediated by the figure of Moses.
In this sense, Freud also offers an interpretation of why monotheistic religions persist over time. He argues that monotheism has taken root in the human psyche because it offers a structure of power and control that resonates deeply with the emotional needs of security and order, as well as the manner in which this occurs. By inserting the figure of a single, authoritative deity, monotheistic religions create a strong psychic bond that perpetuates these beliefs, habits and rites over generations.
Freud understood that Moses introduced monotheism to the Hebrew people, a behavior similar to a process of repression and internalization of a higher authority. This internalization of monotheism profoundly shaped the collective psyche through a structure of power and submission that later reverberates in religions and cultural identities. Such an interpretation, from a psychoanalytic perspective, shows how religion is not only a spiritual phenomenon, but also a psychic instrument of control and identity.
“Here, then, is the historical background to the events that have attracted our interest. Through the conquests of the eighteenth dynasty, Egypt became a world empire. With the young Amenhotep IV, a pharaoh came to power who had no greater interest than the development of this idea of god. He promoted the religion of Aton as the religion of the state and made the universal god the only god; all talk about other gods is lies and deceit. He boasts of his joy in Creation and of his life in Maat (truth and justice). This is the first and perhaps the purest case of monotheistic religion in human history; a deeper understanding of the historical and psychological conditions of its genesis would be of inestimable value” (Freud, 1937).[xiii][21]
Em Moses and Monotheism, Freud associates the mysteries of ancient Egypt with the unknown unconscious. And this correlation has its anchor in the book of Exodus, in which Moses refers to the Egyptian preachers as “wise men, magicians and sorcerers”[xiv]. The technique of free association typical of psychoanalysis would also have support in Egyptian culture, given the relationship of identification between the nomenclature of things and these things themselves, as well as the power attributed to the dimension of the word.
“The Egyptian Moses offered to a section of the people another, higher and more spiritualized conception of divinity, the idea of a single, world-embracing god who was all-loving as well as all-powerful; who, averse to ceremonies and magic, proposed to human beings a life of truth and justice as their supreme goal. However incomplete our information about the ethics of the Aten religion may be, it cannot be without significance that Akhenaten often referred to himself as 'living in Maat' (truth and justice)” (Freud, 1937).[xv][22]
In the work, Freud points out an opposition between “childish and idolatrous consolation” and “consolation of the spirit”, given that the latter is more elevated. In this interpretation, Moses represents a type of modern project of disenchantment of the world (Safatle, 2019)[23] [xvi], given that the prophet Moses is associated with the rejection of idolatry and superstition in the name of truth and justice – Maat. In this way, Freud maintains psychoanalysis as a derivation of this tradition, that is, the idea of the “highest form of consolation”, which denies the simple idolatry of authorities and results in the “consolation of the spirit”: in truth and justice[xvii].
Regarding Moses being the vehicle for the transmission of monotheism, according to Freud, monotheism was not conceived by the Jewish spirit, but an inheritance from Akhenaton. Robert W. Rieber (2012, p.26)[24] [xviii], agrees with the hypothesis that Jewish monotheism was an inheritance from Pharaoh Akhenaton.
“Then there arose from among the people an endless series of men who were not connected with Moses in origin, who were captivated by the great and powerful tradition that had gradually grown up in obscurity – and it was these men, the prophets, who tirelessly preached the old Mosaic doctrine, according to which the god despised sacrifices and ceremonies, demanding only faith and a life of truth and justice ('Maat'). It is an honor to the Jewish people that it preserved this tradition and produced men who gave it voice, even though the stimulus for this came from outside, from a great foreigner” (Freud, 1937).[xx][25]
Unlike most pagan religious cults, the goddess Maat did not demand any sacrifice, ritual or offering, only a life guided by truth and justice. In the Western philosophical tradition, there is a gradual separation between truth and justice, with Kantian philosophy being the pinnacle of this split. Furthermore, she is a deity worshipped only for justice and truth, which, like psychoanalytic practice, has its axis in the articulation of words.
Conclusion
Sigmund Freud conceived psychoanalysis not only as a science of the unconscious, but also developed a method: free association and basic concepts such as drive, transference, repression, symptom and repression. These elements continue to be tools for understanding human subjectivity, which is shaped by history, culture and social changes, thus constituting the psychic apparatus.
“Freud perceives the interpretation of the unconscious as endless. This is because, if the interpretation of the unconscious is infinite, its lack of limits to the knowledge of the unconscious implies, precisely, the limit of knowledge: no answer will be satisfactory and definitive. Man's conflict with the world is not a disease, it is not an error – it is part of his constitution” (Forbes, 2023).[xx][26]
In this sense, Freud's work is alive and dynamic, just like legal science. Freud's texts engage with different fields of knowledge, such as medicine, philosophy, literature, anthropology and law itself, undeniably – which encourages us to think beyond the consulting room and to question our own practices and assumptions.
Reviewing authors such as Sigmund Freud and Hans Kelsen also means doing justice to investigative activity and being open to doubt and refutations. Freud was not afraid to review his own ideas and propose new paths, something that teaches us to keep psychoanalytic thought moving, without crystallizing into dogmas. Thus, redefining understandings involves theoretical and practical challenges that have repercussions on legal life itself.
In view of the above, rereading Sigmund Freud in light of legal dynamism is a constant practice of Zetetics par excellence, due to reflection, updating and rooting. Therefore, it can be said that legal science is not limited to stating the law, but to giving form to the dynamic phenomenon that it studies and operates. This is the compass that allows us to move forward, dialogue with other theorists and adapt Psychoanalysis to the new demands of today's world.
*Karen Osera islawyer and master in philosophy from the Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP).
References
FEDERN, n. Paul. Zur Psychologie der Revolution: Die Vaterlose Gesellschaft. Der Augstieg – Neue Zeit und Streitschrifte Nr (12/13). Anzengrüber Verlag Brüder Suschitzky: Wien, 1919. P. 3-29.
FERRAZ JUNIOR, Tercio Sampaio. Introduction to the Study of Law: technique, decision, domination. Sao Paulo: Atlas, 2003.
FORBES, Jorge. Do you suffer so as not to suffer? Disavowing ready-to-wear suffering. Barueri: Manole Publishing, 2017.
_______________. Psychoanalysis pills: aphorisms and sentences by Jorge Forbes. Santana de Parnaíba [SP]: Manole, 2023.
FREUD, Sigmund (1856-1939). Complete Works, volume 19: Moses and Monotheism, Compendium of psychoanalysis and other texts (1937-1939) / Sigmund Freud; translated by Paulo César de Souza. – 1st edition. – New York: Routledge, 2018.
_______________ (1911). Psychoanalytic notes on an autobiographical account of a case of paranoia (dementia paranoides). Standard Brazilian Edition of the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. XII. Rio de Janeiro: Imago, 2013.
_______________ (1913). totem and taboo. Standard Brazilian Edition of the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. XIII. Rio de Janeiro: Imago, 2013.
_______________ (1914). The history of the psychoanalytic movement. Standard Brazilian Edition of the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. XIV. Rio de Janeiro: Imago, 2013.
_______________ (1917). A difficulty on the path of psychoanalysis. Standard Brazilian Edition of the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. XVII. Rio de Janeiro: Imago, 2013.
KELSEN, Hans. Der soziologische und der juristische Staatsbegriff (1922), Tubingen, Mohr, 1928.
______________. Sozialismus und Staat: Eine Untersuchung der politischen Theorie des Marxismus. Hirschfeld, Leipzig, 1920.
LACAN, Jacques. Opening. In: Writings. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 1998.
RANK, Otto. Das Inzest- Motiv in Dichtung und Sage. Franz Deuticke: Leipzig und Wien, 1926.
REICH, Wilhelm. Dialectical Materialism and Psychoanalysis. Translated by Joaquim José Moura Ramos. 3rd edition. Press: Lisbon, 1977.
RIEBER, Robert W. Freud on interpretation: the ancient magical Egyptian and Jewish traditions. Springer: New York, 2012.
ROUDINESCO, Elisabeth (1944). Why Psychoanalysis? Translation by Vera Ribeiro. Zahar, 2000.
SAFATLE, Vladimir. Full course: Freud as a theorist of modernity. 2009. Department of Philosophy, University of São Paulo.
Notes
[I] FREUD, S. In the text “Moses and Monotheism”, the author focuses on the subject, making an analysis that combines archaeology, Egyptian mythology and the Abrahamic religion.
[ii] FREUD, S. 1923, p. 287.
[iii] FORBES, Jorge. Do you suffer so as not to suffer? Disallowing ready-to-wear suffering. Barueri: Editora Manole, 2017. P. 17.
[iv] LACAN, Jacques, 1957, in an interview with the newspaper L'Express.
[v] RANK, O. Das Inzest- Motiv in Dichtung und Sage. Franz Deuticke: Leipzig und Wien, 1926.
[vi] It is worth noting that characters from Greek mythology were mentioned, except Karna, who belongs to the Mahabharata, Hindu literature; and Gilgamesh, the Babylonian hero.
[vii] In: HEUER, G. Biographical Survey. http://www.ottogrossgesellschaft.com/otto-gross-1877-1920.
[viii] FEDERN, P. Zur Psychologie der Revolution: Die Vaterlose Gesellschaft. Der Augstieg – Neue Zeit und Streitschriften. Number (12/13). Anzengrüber Verlag Brüder Suschitzky: Wien, 1919. P. 3-29.
[ix] ROUDINESCO, Elisabeth (1944). Why Psychoanalysis? Translated by Vera Ribeiro. 1st edition – Zahar, 2000. P. 52.
[X] REICH, W. Dialectical Materialism and Psychoanalysis. Translated by Joaquim José Moura Ramos. 3rd edition. Press: Lisbon, 1977.
[xi] FERRAZ JUNIOR, T. Introduction to the Study of Law: technique, decision, domination. 4th edition. São Paulo: Atlas, 2003. P. 47.
[xii] Freud was fascinated by ancient civilizations, especially the Egyptians. In addition to collecting ancient works of art, he compared psychoanalysis to an archaeological activity.
[xiii] FREUD, S. 2018. P. 83-84.
[xiv] Such predicates were used to compare and describe psychoanalysts, as Robert W. Rieber (2012) did.
[xv] FREUD, S. 2018. P. 74.
[xvi] Expression used by Vladimir Safatle (2009).
[xvii] It is worth remembering here that, since the 19th century, science has investigated (zetetic) the theme of religious phenomena and their effects on civilizations.
[xviii] 2012, p. eleven.
[xx] FREUD, S. 2018. P. 75
[xx] FORBES, J. 2023. P. 91.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
