In an article published this morning at the Charles Colson Center, I referred to an essay that C.S. Lewis published in his book God in the Dock. In the essay, titled “‘Bulverism’ or, the Foundation of 20th Century Thought,” Lewis identified a practice that was becoming widespread in his day – the practice of psychologizing those we disagree with instead of showing how their arguments are actually false.
“Nowadays,” wrote Lewis, “the Freudian will tell you to go and analyse [those who] all think Elizabeth a great queen because they all have a mother-complex. Their thoughts are psychologically tainted at the source.” While it may be true that those who think Elizabeth a great queen do so because they have a mother-complex, “Does the taint invalidate the tainted thought – in the sense of making it untrue – or not?” asks Lewis.
“Nowadays,” wrote Lewis, “the Freudian will tell you to go and analyse [those who] all think Elizabeth a great queen because they all have a mother-complex. Their thoughts are psychologically tainted at the source.” While it may be true that those who think Elizabeth a great queen do so because they have a mother-complex, “Does the taint invalidate the tainted thought – in the sense of making it untrue – or not?” asks Lewis.
We run into this sort of thing all the time. Keep reading...
2 comments:
Great article. Part of psychologizing opponents and diagnosing them as pathologies is the reality of the need of therapy. This puts "them" in power and gives a very powerful too of "controllers" over the controlled - which are the only 2 classes of people in a controlled and command economy. Lewis was also brilliant in the invention of his space "Trilogy" and the insidious social agency for mind control N.I.C.E. This is the "Brave New World."
Fr. Phil+
I feel that this article covers really well half of the situation- with the shift to postmodernism and relativistic views of truth, we also have demographic determinism. That is, one's opinions and beliefs (even one's "truth")are entirely determined by one's demographic. If I support Sarah Palin, it's because I'm a white woman and a homemaker living in the Mid-West. (If I disagree with her, we go into diagnosis, and it's because I'm jealous of her looks and accomplishments.)
We saw this when Justice Sotomayor was nominated to the Supreme Court- it was argued that only a woman can understand the reality other women face, and only a Hispanic can understand the Hispanic reality. It wasn't even pretended that impartial application of the law is a possibility for anyone.
And just to bring this whole thing full circle, I'll just mention that Chris Roseborough on the Fighting for the Faith radio show (a few months back) contended that the concept of truth being determined by groups is actually a hallmark of fascism...
Post a Comment