Civilization and Its Discontents

By: Sigmund Freud

Narrated by: Steven Crossley

Length: 3 hrs and 3 mins

Publisher's summary

First published in 1930, Civilization and Its Discontents is one of the most influential works of pioneering psychologist Sigmund Freud. Focusing on the tension between the primitive drives of the individual and the demands of civilization for order and conformity, Freud draws upon his psychoanalytic theories to explain the fundamental structures, conflicts, and consequences of society. Written in the aftermath of World War I, Civilization and Its Discontents advances the idea that humans' instinctive desires---violent urges and sexual drives---create the need for law and structure, which, when implemented, create constant feelings of discontent. A seminal work in psychology, Civilization and Its Discontents has sparked debate since its publication and continues to be widely read today. This edition is the translation by James Strachey.

©1961 Institute of Psychoanalysis (P)2011 Tantor

Thought I understood Freudian Psychology…

Until I heard this work. Truly, the detail and performance gave an unmistakable clarity to classic Freudian concepts with the larger impact and application on the overall individual psyche and thought-provoking result on collectivism in various social/communal tribes like religion and philosophy.

The recording of the audio could be better

Took one star off performance because the audio itself sounds like someone recorded it, played it on computer speakers, then recorded that and that is our final product here. The narrator is still completely understandable, though.

Freudian Depth Charger

Sometimes Freud reaches too far, others not near enough.
Although his other work has been immensely articulate and nuanced, some parts of this one felt half-baked or cast-off--- as though these snippets were found separately and haphazardly fashioned together.
It's painful to critique such a brilliant and disciplined mind, one whose left shoe would remain mostly empty were I to step into it, but this one overall left me with a sense of less than rather than overflowing.
It has some decidedly insightful parts, I must say, but just not to the same degree of his other more robust and flourished works.

Perfectly read work of an imperfect genius!!

So clear, perfectly executed. Freud, brilliant as is was, had flaws in his analysis, the reader does not, well I dont know him personally but this reading was excellent.

Seminal work engagingly read.

Precise reading of Freud's most important work consolidating the tripartite structure of the mind with the two instincts, the pleasure principle and the death drive. More famously, the book investigates the nature of the social contract as involving the extension of the superego so it stands for society's rules that we must accommodate to enjoy the benefits of civilization.

pretty boring

the subject matter is interesting but this book is none the less very boring. I think it would've been a lot better if it was written in a more digestible way. it's as if he's only speaking to other experts in his field

Very interesting points on human nature and the world

However, in order to understand Freud’s points it is essential to have a basic understanding of the structure of his theory of emotions, etc.

Provides a compelling nature of the self

At one time it was wrongly believed that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny (i.e. the embryonic stages mirrors the development stages of the species). Similarly Freud thinks the phases that an individual goes through mirror the same phases that civilizations have gone through. Freud uses that theme to explain his psychoanalysis in describing individuals and the societies in which they live as mirror images of each other.

Yes, Freud does believe some weird things and he restates them in this book such as the early infant's whole world is the mother's breast and thus we end up fetishizing the breast when we grow up, our time in the womb means we always are looking to return to an abode of some kind, something about the anal fixation and how it never leaves us and unrepressed sex desires lead to our anxieties and other such things that sound weird to our modern ears. But those distractions don't necessarily mean that this book is not highly engaging and worth reading. I'll challenge you to read any recent biography because you''ll almost always see the author slip into Freudian speak (e.g. I'm currently listening to "The Purple Diaries: Mary Astor", and the author says that her father was strict and controlling and that made Mary Astor not trusting of men and unwilling to share her feelings with others particularly men, a very Freudian interruption). It's not a bad way of seeing the world. It's how we understand our selves or others. Now days, we just don't add on the word neurosis or repression, but it's how we cope with the nature within ourselves and others.

I like this book for the same reason I liked Nietzsche's "The Genealogy of Morals". I don't agree with what they are saying, but they provide a narrative that is compelling. Matter of fact, you can tell that Freud is really influenced by Nietzsche within this book. Freud will say something such as the "conscience of the individual gets repudiated by the instinct leading to an anxiety that gives a person guilt" and that leads them to the wanting of taking away of the power of the father. (I don't have the quote exactly, but I think its fairly close to what he was getting at). Nietzsche's "will to power" at it's most basic cries out for how the community takes away our primal instincts, takes us away from "mans instinct to freedom". What Freud does within this book is argues Nietzsche's viewpoint with the emphasis slightly different. Freud states that our conscience gets perturb from within the family and by extension within the community leading away from our authentic (not a Freud word, but I feel comfortable using it here) selves.

As I was listening to this I had to pause to see what year he wrote this book. I noticed it came before Heidegger's "Being in Time". Heidegger had a long section on 'conscience', and seemed to conclude that the conscience is the cause of itself. Freud does a similar thing (if you take his complete statement on the topic within the book and you relate it to the father of the individual as he does or as he does latter on in the book to the sacrifice of the Messiah on the cross, he makes it a complete circle thus giving itself as its own ground (I think)). "Will" is defined as it's own cause by St. Thomas Aquinas thus giving our conscience its primal place in his theology and leading to free will such that God can judge us for our moral acts in a necessary universe but which was contingently created by God exercising His will. Freud is giving us our conscience as a thing in itself and thus we can be blamed for who we are or became (even if we are schizophrenic, autistic, or predisposed to alcoholism by genetics, or whatever).

The conscience leads to guilt because of our repressed neurosis (he'll say). Nietzsche will say the guilt is not real, Heidegger says it is because of the debt we owe to the future because of the one absolute truth we always know (our own impending death), and Freud says we have the guilt always but we repress it thus leading to our neurosis. (I love using that word 'neurosis'. It's totally void of meaning and I think the DSM V doesn't use it at all as a category for that reason). All three are trying to return to us our authenticity which has been taken away from us by civilization (and the family).

Freud in this book also lays out a defense for the importance of character, community, and science and aesthetics in the development of the individual and the functioning of civilization as a whole. He dismisses religion. The neurosis (there's that word again) that exist in the individual also exist within the civilization as a whole (he'll say). By character he is getting at blaming the victim. It's the values that the individual (and species) are not learning properly from their community and will later on allow for 'refrigerator mom's' to be blamed when their child is schizophrenic or have autism. He'll even say that civilization as a whole is currently (1920) suffering from neurosis.

Freud lays all of this stuff out in this book. Do I agree with any of it? Not at all. But, there is a narrative that Freud uses that is fun to follow. I liked this short book so much, I'll probably buy "The General Introduction to Psychoanalysis" by Freud that audible offers which I would guess will cover most of this stuff in deeper detail.

A must-listen

This is an absolute must listen if you wish to understand contemporary psychology or the phenomenon of so-called “liberalism” in the west from the second half of the nineteenth century through the 1960s. This, along with selected works of John Dewey, outline the philosophy and psychology of liberalism. However, unlike Dewey, this is written in much simpler, more accessible language. I disagree with Freud on a great deal, but I would still recommend the work.

Poor production and execution by reader.

The narrator was difficult to understand and so was Freud's stream of consciousness. At times the audio cut out in mid sentence. Freud does bring some good points in this book but definitely not what I was expecting.