Two Kinds of Response to the Challenges of the XX Century: Freud’s Pessimism versus Camus’ Optimism

Early 20th century was a season when European purification found itself in a deep crisis. That was a good old introduction of progress and orderliness in the late 19th century crashed down in the flame of the premier World War. European thinkers had to face a dramatic question whether Europe is still existing and whether its ideals of humanitarianism and enlightenment atomic number 18 still sought- later, or its previous aspiration to the perfect world were in deceitful? Naturally this question was being answered both in pessimistic and rosy light.In this paper I will attempt to analyze these two concepts, using Freuds Civilization and Its Discontents as an example of pessimism and Camus nuisance as example of optimism. At that I am going to argue that both pessimistic and optimistic approach attempted to discover latent essential aspects of human temperament. The difference was unless in the lieu towards these aspects. Freuds work can be distinctively separated into two great periods before and after the WWI. In the first period he explored the optimistic desire of life, pleasure and reproduction that he called Eros.In the second period he became avocationed in the desire of death and killing that he called Thanatos. about basically, he attempted to explain what does mankind exist for, and in the Civilization and Its Discontents he finally melancholically notice that The question of the purpose of human life has been raised countless times it has never received a satisfactory answer and perhaps does not admit of one. (Freud 51). In contrast to Freuds runaround, Camus does answer the question, or, stop to say, offers two answers.The first one is devoted by the people before the Plague Their chief interest is in commerce, and their chief aim in life is, as they call it, doing business. (Camus 2). The second one is given after the Plague has come if there is one thing one can always pine away for and sometimes attain, it is human hit the sac k. (Camus 298). In Camus novel the Plague does not certainly mean war, this is rather a disaster that makes people unite in their new understanding of life values.But what makes people alternate in the disaster and what are the motivations that cause them to change? Freud sees a dramatic conflict between civilization and human nature. In order to become civilized and make use of the benefits of civilization people stupefy to oppress their own nature and civilization, therefore, obtains mastery over the individuals dangerous desire for aggression by alter and disarming it and by setting up an agency within him to watch over it, like a garrison in a conquered city. (Freud 119).Yet those hidden inclinations never disappear and explode like an overheat steam boiler as soon as civilization control weakens in such situations as war or distress. Then people are no longer driven by rules, only by instincts, including desire to deaden and die, that tragically prevails over desire to li ve and give life. Camus agrees with Freud and also pays groovy attention to relations between civilized human individual and the world of indispensable instincts. He notes that whats natural is the microbe.All the rest-heath, integrity, purity (if you like)-is a product of the human will, of a vigilance that must never waffle. (Camus 253). Yet the book does not include much descriptions of any behavior that Freud would call natural. in that location are few scenes of cruelty, bit most of the men stay men like guards at the provide who are not interested in the disgust at all and can easily be bribed to let a man leave the affected city. Life continues even in the times of plague and instinctive behavior is not demonstrated as soon as may be, but only in the most stressing situations.A habit to be civilized still prevails in the Plague. Freud is unable to materialise a way out of this conflict and his late confessions like readiness for a universal love of mankind and the worl d represents the highest standpoint which man can reach (Freud 91) sound futile and unrelated to the subject matter. In contrast to this, his conclusion that One feels inclined to say that the intention that man should be happy is not included in the plan of Creation. (Freud 53) seems to tally up the entire Freuds work.The more people play to become good and orderly, the worse shall be the following explosion of the steam boiler. Human nature is unchangeable and wild for Freud. Camus idea of the role of instinctive side of human nature is different. Men are good after all, and even their instincts can be enjoyable. One of the last scenes of the novel occurs on the seashore. The precedent and a friend of him go swimming symbolically both cleaning themselves from plague and returning to natural roots of their personality. Unknown and uncontrolled dies not surely mean bad for Camus. A disaster does notify the hidden, it strips individual personalities to reveal their most suppress ed inclinations, but who said that those inclinations are always bad? What we let on in time of pestilence that there are more things to admire in men than to freeze off (Camus 306) concludes Camus. Such optimism without hope did give hope to the ruined Europe.