Erich Fromm

Anatomy of human destructiveness

DER MENCHLICHEN DESTRUCTIVIAT

Translation from German EM. Telyatnikova

Computer design V.A. Voronina

Reprinted with permission from The Estate of Erich Fromm and of Annis Fromm and Liepman AG, Literary Agency.

© Erich Fromm, 1973

© Translation. EM. Telyatnikova, heirs, 2014

© Russian edition AST Publishers, 2015

Humanistic psychoanalysis by Erich Fromm

Erich Fromm (1900–1980) is one of those “great psychological theorists” (M. Yaroshevsky), whose ideas had a tremendous influence not only on psychology itself, but also on philosophy, anthropology, history, and sociology. Sigmund Freud, Carl Gustav Jung, Karen Horney, Harry Sullivan, Erich Fromm - all these scientists were distinguished by paradigmatic thinking, that is, their ideas “gave birth to a revolution in the minds of people” (P. Gurevich).

Fromm began as a student of Freud, however, like C. G. Jung, he quickly realized the limitations of Freudianism. Agreeing that Freud offered humanity a fundamentally new scheme of thinking, he believed that Freudianism is “a product of its culture”, which does not have the opportunity to go beyond its framework. “Humanistic psychoanalysis” proposed by Fromm is an attempt to overcome the “biological” and “mythological” nature of Freud’s teachings, to combine the undoubted achievements of Freudianism with sociological theories in an effort to create a harmonious social structure, a “healthy society” (that was the name of one of Fromm’s works) based on psychoanalytic “ social and individual therapy."

Erich Fromm was born on March 23, 1900 in Frankfurt into an Orthodox Jewish family. His father sold grape wine, and his paternal grandfather and great-grandfather were rabbis. Erich's mother, Rosa Krause, was originally from Russian emigrants who moved to Finland and converted to Judaism.

The family lived in accordance with the patriarchal traditions of the pre-bourgeois era, marked by the spirit of religiosity, hard work and careful observance of rituals.

Erich received a good primary education. The gymnasium, which taught Latin, English and French, aroused his interest in Old Testament texts. True, he did not like tales of heroic battles because of their cruelty; but he liked the stories about Adam and Eve, about the predictions of Abraham and especially the prophecies of Isaiah and other prophets. Pictures of a universal world, in which a lion and a sheep live side by side, attracted the boy’s attention very early, and later became an impetus for thinking about the life of the human community, and for the ideas of internationalism. In the middle classes of the gymnasium, Erich Fromm formed a protest against mass madness leading to war, the beginning of which the young man met with pain and bewilderment (1914).

At the same time, he is experiencing his first personal shock, which had a very serious impact on him: a lovely young woman, an artist, a family friend, committed suicide after the death of her old, sick father. Her last wish was to be buried with her father. Erich painfully reflects on questions of life and love and, most importantly, strives to understand how strong this woman’s love was for her father, that she preferred unity with him (even in death) to all the joys of life. These observations and thoughts led Fromm to the path of psychoanalysis. He began to try to understand the motives of human behavior.

In 1918, he began to study psychology, philosophy and sociology at Frankfurt and then Heidelberg universities, where his other teachers included Max Weber, Alfred Weber, Karl Jaspers, Heinrich Rickert and other world-class philosophers. At the age of 22, he became a Doctor of Philosophy and then continued his education in Munich and completed his studies at the famous Institute of Psychoanalysis in Berlin. Fromm early became acquainted with the philosophical works of K. Marx, which attracted him primarily with the ideas of humanism, understood as the complete liberation of man, as well as the creation of opportunities for his self-expression.

Another important source of Fromm's personal and professional interests in the 1920s. becomes the psychoanalysis of Sigmund Freud. Fromm's first wife was Frieda Reichman, an educated woman and psychologist; and Erich, who was much younger than Frida, became interested in the clinical practice of psychoanalysis under her influence. They lived together for only four years, but throughout their lives they retained their friendly disposition and the ability to collaborate creatively.

Fromm's third spiritual source was the German philosopher Johann Jacob Bachofen. His doctrine of maternal right subsequently became for Fromm an important argument refuting Freud's theory of libido.

In the 1920s Fromm became acquainted with the teachings of Buddhism, which he perceived as an insight, and was faithful to it until his old age.

In 1927–1929 Fromm begins to publish a lot. He became famous for his presentation on “Psychoanalysis and Sociology,” and then the publication of an article entitled “On the method and tasks of analytical social psychology: remarks on psychoanalysis and historical materialism.”

For almost ten years (1930–1939) his fate was connected with the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research, which was headed by Max Horkheimer. Fromm heads the department of social psychology here, conducts a series of empirical studies among workers and employees, and by 1932 he concludes that the workers will not resist Hitler’s dictatorial regime. In 1933, Frome left Germany, moved to Chicago, and then to New York, where Horkheimer and his institute would soon relocate. Here, scientists together continue to study the socio-psychological problems of authoritarianism, and also publish the periodical “Journal of Social Research”.

In the 1940s confrontation with Adorno and Marcuse leads to Fromm's departure from the Frankfurt school. Having broken away from his “German roots,” he finds himself completely in an American environment: he works in many educational institutions, participates in various unions and associations of American psychoanalysts. When the Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Psychoanalysis was created in Washington in 1946, Frome was actively involved in the systematic training of specialists in the field of psychoanalysis. But Fromm was never an ordinary professor of any department; he always taught his course at an “interdisciplinary” level and, like no one else, was able to not only connect together the data of anthropology, political science and social psychology, but also illustrate them with facts from his clinical practice.

In the 1950s Fromm moves away from Freud's theory and gradually forms his own concept of personality, which he himself called “radical humanism.”

The reasons for Fromm's revision of Freud's concept are quite obvious. This is, first of all, the rapid development of science, especially social psychology and sociology. This is the shock that Fromm himself suffered due to the rise to power of fascism, forced emigration and the need to switch to a completely new clientele. It was the practice of psychotherapy on the American continent that led him to the conclusion that the neuroses of the 20th century. It is impossible to explain solely by biological factors that drives and instincts are a completely insufficient determinant of human behavior in an industrial society.

“It is impossible to list all the radical humanists since Marx,” says Fromm, “but I would like to name the following: Thoreau, Emerson, Albert Schweitzer, Ernst Bloch, Ivan Illich; Yugoslav philosophers from the Praxis group: M. Markvic, G. Petrovic, S. Stojanovic, S. Supek, P. Vranicki; economist E. F. Schumacher; political figure Erhard Eppler, as well as many representatives of religious and radical humanist unions in Europe and America of the 20th century.”

Despite all the differences in the views of radical humanists, their fundamental positions coincide on the following points:

– production should serve people, not the economy;

– relations between man and nature should be built not on exploitation, but on cooperation;

– antagonisms everywhere must be replaced by relations of solidarity;

– the highest goal of all social activities should be human welfare and the prevention of human suffering;

– not maximum consumption, but only reasonable consumption serves human health and well-being;

– every person should be interested in and involved in active work for the benefit of other people.

After the end of World War II, Fromm decides not to return to Germany. He settled in Mexico on the seashore (in the city of Cuerno Vaco), received a professorship at the National University in Mexico City, collaborated with progressive-minded Latin American scientists, and lectured in the United States.

The 1950s were notable for their interest in socio-theoretical and socio-political problems. Works of these years: lectures “Psychoanalysis and Religion”, analysis of the epic “Fairy Tales, Myths and Dreams” (1951), two philosophical works - “A Healthy Society” (1955) and “Modern Man and His Future” (1959), as well as many public speeches, reports and articles. Fromm participates in political activities, in the development of the program of the American Social Democratic Federation (SDF), which he joined for a short time, until he was convinced that Social Democracy had greatly “recovered.”

Anatomy of human destructiveness Erich Fromm

(No ratings yet)

Title: Anatomy of human destructiveness
Author: Erich Fromm
Year: 1973
Genre: Foreign educational literature, Foreign psychology, Classics of psychology, Personal growth, Philosophy

About the book “Anatomy of Human Destructiveness” by Erich Fromm

How sometimes you want to philosophize on the topic of good and evil, because sometimes you watch the news and are simply amazed where people get such unbearable cruelty from! The best assistant in this matter can be the famous philosopher and psychologist Erich Fromm, author of the book “The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness.” No, you shouldn’t worry about the fact that a person will have a collection of dry and unemotional lectures in front of you, which will be boring to read. This book, on the contrary, is distinguished by its liveliness and lack of feeling of constraint.

“The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness” fundamentally relates to the study of the characteristics of human psychology and the influence of the surrounding world on it. The work is not a superficial collection of smart thoughts, which are very “fun” to read, but a real full-fledged anatomy, because the author studies the issue on absolutely all fronts. While reading, you get the feeling that the “guests” in the lecture hall are psychology, political science, sociology, anthropology and other sciences, which are also mentioned in the book.

Erich Fromm describes examples and reasoning in a very interesting and realistic way. An image appears in my head of a professor walking around a person, examining him and pointing out important points that reflect the person’s psychological state. The philosopher allows each reader to become part of a journey into the issue of cruelty through centuries and eras. It is very pleasing that in his work “The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness” Erich Fromm does not dwell on his opinion at all, he considers different points of view, allowing the reader to draw his own conclusions.

It is worth noting once again that this book is an excellent opportunity to understand the peculiarities of human psychology, which is fraught with many “surprises” that are gradually revealed by specialists. It is better to read the work intermittently, because the layer of information embedded in the work is not so easy to assimilate at one time. It is better to divide the process of getting acquainted with the book “The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness” into several parts, so as not to get confused, analyze the data and, possibly, write something down.

Creation is one of the best philosophical analyzes of human nature, so every individual, regardless of occupation, should take the time to read the above-mentioned work, because the knowledge gained is truly priceless!

On our website about books, you can download the site for free without registration or read online the book “The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness” by Erich Fromm in epub, fb2, txt, rtf, pdf formats for iPad, iPhone, Android and Kindle. The book will give you a lot of pleasant moments and real pleasure from reading. You can buy the full version from our partner. Also, here you will find the latest news from the literary world, learn the biography of your favorite authors. For beginning writers, there is a separate section with useful tips and tricks, interesting articles, thanks to which you yourself can try your hand at literary crafts.

Quotes from the book “Anatomy of Human Destructiveness” by Erich Fromm

Passions are his religion, his cult and his ritual, and he is forced to hide them even from himself, especially if he does not receive the support of the group. At the cost of extortion and bribery, he can be forced to renounce his “religion” and become an adherent of a new cult - the cult of the robot. But such a psychological approach takes away from a person his last asset - the ability to be not a thing, but a person.

From an educated guess to a hypothesis and further to a theory - this is the path of knowledge; from ignorance to knowledge, from uncertainty to truth - through feelings, reason, critical thinking and imagination. For someone who has these abilities, relative uncertainty is a completely normal thing, because it brings to life the activation of all abilities. Certainty is sad because it is dead.

All one person can do to help another is to reveal to him truthfully and lovingly, but without sentimentality or illusion, the existence of an alternative.

A person needs the drama of life and experiences; and if he does not find satisfaction at the highest level of his achievements, then he creates for himself a drama of destruction.

With the emergence of consciousness, a new dimension appears in a person: the dimension of good and evil. And then a contradiction comes into the world, and a curse comes into the life of a person (both men and women).

It turns out that a person is much more excited (excited) by anger, rage, cruelty or a thirst for destruction than by love, creativity or any other productive interest. It turns out that the first type of excitement does not require any effort from a person: neither patience, nor discipline, nor critical thinking, nor self-restraint; To do this, you don’t need to study, concentrate your attention, fight your dubious desires, or renounce your narcissism. People with a low spiritual level are always helped by “simple irritants”; they are always in abundance: you can read about wars and disasters, fires, crimes in newspapers, see them on the screen or hear about them on the radio. You can create similar “irritants” for yourself: after all, there will always be a reason to hate someone, control someone, and harm someone.

The personality loses its active responsible role in the social process; a person becomes a completely “conformal” being and gets used to the fact that any behavior, action, thought and even feeling that deviates from the standard will have negative consequences for him; he is effective only in what is expected of him. If he insists on his uniqueness, then in a police state he risks losing not only his freedom, but also his life; in some democratic systems he risks his career, sometimes the loss of his job, and most importantly, he risks being isolated. Although most people are not aware of their inner discomfort, they still experience a vague feeling of fear of life, they are afraid of the future, loneliness, melancholy and the meaninglessness of their existence. They feel that their own ideals are not supported by social reality. What a huge relief they must experience when they learn that the device is the best, most progressive and
effective form of life.

Download the book “The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness” for free by Erich Fromm

In format fb2: Download
In format rtf: Download
In format epub: Download
In format txt:

Anatomy of human destructiveness

The result of evolution. This theory of innate aggressiveness very easily turns into an ideology that alleviates fear of what might happen and helps rationalize* feelings of helplessness. There are also other reasons why some people prefer a simplified solution to the problem of destructiveness within the framework of instinctivist theory. A serious study of the causes of destructiveness may call into question the foundations of major ideological systems. Here it is impossible to avoid analyzing the problem of the irrationality of our social system; here we will have to break some taboos hiding behind the sacred concepts of “security”, “honor”, ​​“patriotism”, etc. It is enough to conduct a serious study of our social system to draw a conclusion about the causes of growth destructiveness in society and suggest means to reduce it. The instinctivist theory relieves us of the difficult task of such in-depth analysis. She reassures us and declares that even if we all must perish, then we can at least console ourselves with the fact that our fate is determined by the very “nature” of man and that everything is going exactly as it should have gone. Given the current state of psychological thought, anyone who encounters criticism of Lorentz's theory of aggressiveness expects it to come from behaviorism, another theory that dominates psychology. In contrast to instinctivism, behaviorism is not interested in subjective motives, forces that impose a certain way of behavior on a person; Behaviorist theory is not interested in passions or affects, but only in the type of behavior and social incentives that shape this behavior. A radical reorientation of psychology from affects to behavior occurred in the 20s, and in the subsequent period, many psychologists expelled the concepts of passion and emotion from their scientific use, as not subject to scientific analysis. Behavior itself, and not the person behaving in one way or another, has become the subject of the main psychological trend. The “science of the soul” has turned into the science of manipulating behavior - animal and human. This development reached its peak in the neobehaviorism of Skinner, who today represents a generally accepted psychological theory in US universities. It is not difficult to discover the reasons for this turn within psychological science. A scientist engaged in the study of man is more susceptible than any other researcher to the influence of the social climate. This happens because not only he himself, his way of thinking, his interests and the questions raised by him are determined by society (as happens in the natural sciences), but also the very subject of his research - man - is determined by society. Every time a psychologist talks about a person, people from his immediate environment serve as a model for him - and above all, himself. In modern industrial society, people are guided by reason, their feelings are poor, emotions seem to them to be unnecessary ballast, and this is the case both for the psychologist himself and for the objects of his research. Therefore, the behaviorist theory completely satisfies them. The confrontation between instinctivism and behaviorism did not contribute to the progress of psychological science. Each position was a manifestation of a "one-sided approach", both were based on dogmatic principles and required researchers to adapt to either one or the other theory. But is there really only such an alternative in choosing a theory - either instinctivist or behaviorist? Is it really necessary to choose between Skinner and Lorenz? Aren't there other options? In this book I argue that there is another possibility and try to figure out what it is. We must distinguish between two completely different types of aggression in a person. The first type, common to both humans and all animals, is a phylogenetically inherent impulse to attack (or flee) in a situation where life is threatened. This defensive “benign” aggression serves the survival of the individual and the species; it has biological forms of manifestation and fades away as soon as the danger disappears. Another type is represented by “malignant” aggression - this is destructiveness and cruelty, which are characteristic only of humans and are practically absent in other mammals; it has no phylogenetic program, does not serve biological adaptation, and has no purpose. Much of the previous controversy on this topic was caused by the fact that there was no distinction between these two types of aggression, which are different both in origin and in distinctive features. Defensive aggression is indeed inherent in human nature, although in this case we are not talking about an “innate” instinct, as was commonly believed. When Lorenz talks about aggression as a method of defense, he is right in his assumption that we are talking about an aggressive instinct (although the theory of the spontaneity of drives and their ability to self-discharge does not stand up to criticism). But Lorenz goes even further. He uses a number of sophisticated logical constructs to represent any human aggression, including the desire to torture and kill, as a consequence of biologically given aggressiveness, which, from his point of view, under the influence of a number of different factors turns from a necessary protective force into a destructive force. Numerous empirical data speak against this hypothesis, and therefore it is practically untenable. The study of animal behavior shows that although mammals - especially primates - display a fair degree of defensive aggression, they are neither torturers nor killers. Paleontology, anthropology and history provide us with numerous examples that contradict the instinctivist concept, which upholds three basic principles: 1. Human groups differ from each other in the degree of their destructiveness - this fact can only be explained based on the assumption of the innate nature of cruelty and destructiveness. 2. Different degrees of destructiveness may be associated with other mental factors and with differences in relevant social structures. 3. As civilization progresses, the degree of destructiveness increases (and not vice versa). In fact, the concept of innate destructiveness is a matter of history rather than prehistory. After all, if a person were endowed only with biologically adaptive aggression, which makes him related to his animal ancestors, then he would be a relatively peace-loving creature; and if there were psychologists among the chimpanzees, the problem of aggression would hardly bother them enough to write entire books about it. But the fact of the matter is that man differs from animals precisely in that he is a killer. This is the only representative of primates who, without biological or economic reasons, tortures and kills his fellow tribesmen and still finds satisfaction in this. This is the same biologically abnormal and phylogenetically not programmed “malignant” aggression that poses a real problem and danger to the survival of the human race; clarification of the essence and conditions for the emergence of such destructive aggression is precisely the main goal of this book. The distinction between benign-defensive and malignant-destructive aggression requires an even more thorough differentiation of two categories, namely: instinct and character, more precisely, the distinction between natural drives, which are rooted in physiological needs, and specifically human passions, which are rooted in character ("characterological" , or human passions"). This differentiation between instinct and character will be discussed in detail later. I will try to show that character is the "second nature" of man, a substitute for his underdeveloped instincts; that human passions correspond to the existential needs* of a person, and the latter, in turn, are determined by the specific conditions of human existence. In short, instincts are a response to the physiological needs of a person, and passions that grow from character (the need for love, tenderness, freedom, destruction, sadism, masochism, thirst for property and power) are all responses to existential needs, and they are specifically human. Although existential needs are the same for all people, individuals and groups differ in terms of their predominant passions. For example, a person may be driven by love or a passion for destruction, but in each case he satisfies one of his existential needs - the need to “influence” someone. And what will prevail in a person - love or the thirst for destruction - largely depends on social conditions; these conditions influence the biologically given existential situation and the needs arising in connection with this (and not the infinitely variable and elusive psyche, as representatives of the environmental theory believe). When we want to know what constitutes the conditions of human existence, the main questions arise: what is the essence of man? what makes a person human? It is hardly worth proving that the discussion of such problems in modern social science cannot be considered fruitful. These problems are still considered the prerogative of philosophy and religion; and the positivist direction considers them in a purely subjectivist aspect, ignoring any objectivity. Since I don’t want to get ahead of myself and present a detailed argument based on facts, I will limit myself for now to a few comments. For my part, I approach these issues from a biosocial perspective. The main premise is this: since the specific features of Homo sapiens can be defined from the standpoint of anatomy, neurology and physiology, we must learn to define a member of the human race from the standpoint of psychology. In an attempt to define human essence, we do not rely on such abstractions as speculative metaphysics operates in person, for example, Heidegger and Sartre. We turn to the real conditions of existence of a real living person, so that the concept of the essence of each individual coincides with the concept of existence (existence) of the species. We arrive at this concept through empirical analysis of anatomical and neurophysiological human types and their mental correlates (i.e., mental states corresponding to these data). We replace the Freudian physiological principle of explaining human passions with the evolutionary sociobiological principle of historicism. Only when relying on such a theoretical foundation does it become possible to discuss in detail the various forms and personality types of malignant aggression, especially such as sadism (passionate desire for unlimited power over another living being) and necrophilia (passion for the destruction of life and attachment to everything that is dead, decayed, purely mechanical). Understanding these personality types became possible, I think, thanks to the analysis of the characters of several persons known for their sadism and destructiveness, such as Stalin, Himmler, Hitler. So, we have outlined the structure of this study, and now it makes sense to name some premises and conclusions that the reader will encounter in subsequent chapters. 1. We do not intend to deal with behavior as such, in isolation from the acting person; our subject is human aspirations, whether they are expressed by directly observable behavior or not. In the case of the phenomenon of aggression, this means that we will examine the origin and intensity of the aggressive impulse, and not aggressive behavior in isolation from its motivation. 2. These impulses may be conscious, but in most cases they are unconscious. 3. Most often they are integrated into a relatively permanent personality structure. 4. In a broad sense, this study is based on psychoanalytic theory. It follows that we will resort to the method of psychoanalysis, which reveals the unconscious inner reality by interpreting observable and apparently insignificant data. But we still use the expression “psychoanalysis” not in the sense of Freud’s classical theory, but in the sense of the further development of Freudianism. I will discuss the main aspects of this development in more detail later; here it should only be noted that my psychoanalysis is not based on the theory of libido and does not proceed from instinctivist ideas, which, according to general opinion, constitute the core and essence of Freud's theory. The identification of Freud's theory with instinctivism is already very problematic. Freud was in fact the first modern psychologist to

Publisher: AST, 2004, - 635 p.
ISBN: 5-17-023209-8.
Per. from English E. M. Telyatnikova, T. V. Panfilova Series: Philosophy.
This book is the first volume of the failed multi-volume systematization of psychoanalysis that E. Fromm dreamed of implementing. The content of the book is much broader than indicated in the title. The work analyzes the problem of evil in man, in social relations, in history. The book is addressed to a wide range of readers. Table of contents.
Erich Fromm. biographical information.
Preface.
Terminological explanations.
Introduction: instincts and human passions.
Teachings about instincts and drives; behaviorism; psychoanalysis.
Representatives of instinctivism.
Older generation of researchers.
The modern generation of researchers: Sigmund Freud and Konrad Lorenz.
Sigmund Freud's concept of aggression.
Konrad Lorenz's theory of aggression.
Freud and Lorenz: similarities and differences.
About war: the result of Lorenz's concept.
Deification of evolution.
Behaviorism and environmental theory.
The theory of the environment among educators.
Behaviorism.
Neobehaviorism B.F. Skinner.
Goals and values.
Reasons for Skinner's popularity.
Behaviorism and aggression.
About psychological experiments.
The theory of frustration aggression.
Behaviorism and instinctivism: similarities and differences.
Similarities.
About the political and social background of both theories.
A psychoanalytic approach to understanding aggression.
Discoveries refuting instinctivists.
Neurophysiology.
The brain as the basis of aggressive behavior.
Flight instinct.
Predatory behavior and aggressiveness.
Animal behavior.
Aggression in captivity.
Overcrowding and aggressiveness in humans.
Aggressiveness of animals in natural habitats.
The problem of territory and leadership.
Aggression of other mammals.
Does a person have the instinct “do not kill!”?
Paleontology.
Is man a special species?
Is man a predator?
Anthropology.
Is “Man the Hunter” the hell of anthropology?
Primitive hunters and aggressiveness.
War among primitive peoples.
Neolithic revolution.
Prehistoric society and human nature.
Revolution of cities.
How did this happen?
Aggression in primitive cultures.
Analysis of thirty primitive tribes.
System a: life-affirming societies.
System c: non-destructive, but still aggressive society.
System c: destructive societies.
Zuni Indians (system a).
Manus tribe (system B).
Dobu (system c).
Symptoms of cruelty and destructiveness.
Various types of aggression and destructiveness and their prerequisites.
Benign aggression.
Preliminary remarks.
Pseudo-aggression.
Unintentional aggression.
Play aggression.
Aggression as self-affirmation.
Defensive aggression.
Difference between man and animal.
Aggression and freedom.
Aggression and narcissism.
Aggressiveness and resistance.
Aggression and conformism.
Instrumental aggression.
About the causes of wars.
Conditions for reducing defensive aggression.
Malignant aggression: background.
Preliminary remarks.
Human nature.
Existential needs of a person and various passions rooted in his character.
Value orientations and the object of veneration.
Historical roots.
A feeling of togetherness.
Creative skills.
Excitement and stimulation.
Chronic depression and boredom (melancholy).
Character structure.
Neurophysical background.
Social conditions.
About the rationality and irrationality of instincts and passions.
Psychological function of passions.
Malignant aggression: cruelty and destructiveness.
Apparent destructiveness.
Spontaneous forms.
Historical review.
Destructiveness of revenge.
Ecstatic destructiveness.
Worship of destructiveness.
Ernst von Salomon and his hero Kern.
A clinical case of worshiping an idol of destruction.
Destructive character: sadism.
Examples of sexual sadism and masochism.
Joseph Stalin, a clinical case of non-sexual sadism.
The essence of sadism.
Conditions that cause sadism.
Heinrich Himmler, a clinical case of anal-accumulative sadism.
Conclusions.
Malignant aggression: necrophilia.
Traditional performances.
Necrophilic character.
Necrophilic dreams.
"Unintentional" necrophilic actions.
Necrophilic language.
Deification of technology and necrophilia.
Manifesto of Futurism.
Hypothesis about incest and the Oedipus complex.
The relationship of Freud's theory of drives to biophilia and necrophilia.
Symptoms of "necrophilia".
Malignant aggression: Adolf Hitler - a clinical case of necrophilia.
Preliminary remarks.
Hitler's parents and early childhood.
Clara Hitler.
Alois Hitler.
Adolf Hitler's early childhood (up to age six: 1889-1895).
Hitler's childhood (from six to eleven years old: 1895-1900).
Boyhood and youth (from eleven to seventeen years old: 1900-1906).
Vienna (1907-1913).
Munich.
Methodological notes.
Hitler's destructiveness.
Repressing destructiveness.
Other aspects of Hitler's personality.
Relationships with women.
Talents and abilities.
Disguise.
Lack of will and realism.
Epilogue: about the duality of hope.
Appendix: Freud's theory of aggressiveness and destructiveness.
Notes
Index of names.
notes.

Erich Fromm was born on March 23, 1900 in Frankfurt into an Orthodox Jewish family. His father sold grape wine, and his paternal grandfather and great-grandfather were rabbis. Erich's mother, Rosa Krause, was originally from Russian emigrants who moved to Finland and converted to Judaism.

The family lived in accordance with the patriarchal traditions of the pre-bourgeois era, marked by the spirit of religiosity, hard work and careful observance of rituals.

Erich received a good primary education. The gymnasium, which taught Latin, English and French, aroused his interest in Old Testament texts. True, he did not like tales of heroic battles because of their cruelty; but he liked the stories about Adam and Eve, about the predictions of Abraham and especially the prophecies of Isaiah and other prophets. Pictures of a universal world, in which a lion and a sheep live side by side, attracted the boy’s attention very early, and later became an impetus for thinking about the life of the human community, and for the ideas of internationalism. In the middle classes of the gymnasium, Erich Fromm formed a protest against mass madness leading to war, the beginning of which the young man met with pain and bewilderment (1914).

At the same time, he is experiencing his first personal shock, which had a very serious impact on him: a lovely young woman, an artist, a family friend, committed suicide after the death of her old, sick father. Her last wish was to be buried with her father. Erich painfully reflects on questions of life and love and, most importantly, strives to understand how strong this woman’s love was for her father, that she preferred unity with him (even in death) to all the joys of life. These observations and thoughts led Fromm to the path of psychoanalysis. He began to try to understand the motives of human behavior.

In 1918, he began to study psychology, philosophy and sociology at Frankfurt and then Heidelberg universities, where his other teachers included Max Weber, Alfred Weber, Karl Jaspers, Heinrich Rickert and other world-class philosophers. At the age of 22, he became a Doctor of Philosophy and then continued his education in Munich and completed his studies at the famous Institute of Psychoanalysis in Berlin. Fromm early became acquainted with the philosophical works of K. Marx, which attracted him primarily with the ideas of humanism, understood as the complete liberation of man, as well as the creation of opportunities for his self-expression.

PREFACE

This publication represents the first volume of an extensive study in the field of psychoanalytic theory. I began studying aggression and destructiveness not only because they are one of the most important theoretical problems of psychoanalysis, but also because the wave of destructiveness that is sweeping the whole world today gives reason to think that such research will have serious practical significance.

More than six years ago, when I began writing this book, I underestimated the possible difficulties and obstacles. It soon became clear to me that, while remaining within the professional boundaries of psychoanalysis itself, I would not be able to adequately assess the problems of human destructiveness. Although such research has a primarily psychoanalytic aspect, I needed data from other fields of knowledge, especially neurophysiology, animal psychology, paleontology and anthropology. I was forced to compare my findings with the most important findings of other sciences to make sure that these conclusions did not contradict my hypotheses.

Since at that time there was no general work on the problem of aggressiveness, there were no reports or reviews, I was forced to do this work myself. So I tried to do my readers a favor and look at the problem of destructiveness from a global perspective, and not just from the point of view of a particular scientific discipline. Such an attempt is naturally unsafe. After all, it is clear that I could not be competent enough in all areas; I had the least knowledge in the field of neurology. And the knowledge that I acquired, I owe not so much to my own labors, but to the friendly participation of several neurological specialists who gave me valuable advice, answered many of my questions, and also reviewed a significant part of my manuscript

It should be added that often many specialists speak from completely different positions; there is no unity between them - especially in the field of paleontology and anthropology. After a serious study of all points of view, I settled on those which were either accepted by the majority of authors, or convinced me by their logic, or, finally, on those which seemed less susceptible to the influence of prevailing prejudices. It is impossible to present all polar points of view in detail within the framework of one book; but I have tried, as far as possible, to present opposing views and give them a critical assessment. And even if specialists find that I have nothing new to offer them in their narrow field, they will still likely welcome the opportunity to expand their knowledge of the subject of interest to them from information from other research areas. There are difficulties with repetitions from my earlier works. After all, I have been working on the problems of the individual and society for more than 40 years, and each time, focusing my attention on a new aspect of this problem, I simultaneously clarified, deepened and honed my ideas developed in previous studies. I could not write about destructiveness without using many ideas already expressed earlier, although I tried to avoid repetition whenever possible, referring readers to more detailed exposition in other publications, but this was not always successful. This is especially true of my book “The Soul of Man”

It is my pleasure to thank those who helped me create this book. This is first of all Dr. Jerome Brahms, to whom I owe a lot.

I thank Dr. Juan de Dios Hernandez who helped me in the field of neurophysiology. During our hours-long discussions, he provided me with information about the literature and reviewed and commented on the neurophysiological portions of my manuscript.