Disappointed by Civilisation
Why did the war shock educated Europeans so deeply? The first part of "Thoughts for the Times on War and Death" argues that what died was an illusion about ourselves.
Freud describes the citizen who believed the great nations shared one cultural home and now watched their states lie, cheat and kill. The state, he observes, had banned wrongdoing only to keep a monopoly on it. Drives are neither good nor evil; education and the wish to be loved reshape them, but many people behave well only under outside pressure, as cultural hypocrites. The disappointment, strictly speaking, was unjustified: the war had not made people worse, it had only shown how little they had risen.
- war
- civilization
- culture
- moral psychology
- ethics
- morality
- violence
- illusion
- social norms
- moral development
- socialization
Enter a dialogue
- The state, says your essay on war and death, forbids wrongdoing only to keep a monopoly on it, like salt and tobacco. What did the war reveal?
- Most of us, you argue, behave better than our drives would have us, and so are cultural hypocrites. Does civilisation need some of that hypocrisy?
- Before the war the great nations seemed to share one cultural home, its museums and landscapes open to all. What exactly broke when that community fell apart?
- A war full of cruelty seems to prove that people are simply wicked. Why do you refuse to call the human drives either good or evil?