Darwin, Freud, Marx

Portrait: Charles Darwin

Portrait: Charles Darwin

Portrait: Charles Darwin

Portrait: Sigmund Freud

Portrait: Sigmund Freud

Portrait: Sigmund Freud

Portrait: Karl Marx

Portrait: Karl Marx

Portrait: Karl Marx

The names of the three great mentioned in the title have often been recalled together in order to synthesize the powerful attack struck against the world’s mental representation the religion of the time had built up and supported in the centuries: both earth and man are at the core of God’s plan, therefore the investigative approach to the study of matter cannot but recognize, deeply engraved into it, the excellence of divine laws towards mankind.
No need to point out that Darwin’s theory of natural selection, as well as Freud’s view of God as the Super-Ego and furthermore Marx’s concept of religion as “opium of peoples” have been powerful blows against this very image, not inasmuch as in ancient times when you’d have been burnt on the stake for much less than that, but above all, as Nietzsche emphasizes with a deeply felt emotion, “What have we ever done, by untying this Earth from her Sun’s chains? Whereto are we going now? Is not the empty space breathing over us?”
Even though a many decades’ gap elapsed, still the irreconcilable fight between supporters and opponents of these foremost thinkers goes on with the same apparent intransigence from either parties. Actually, this contest does not live only upon a critical discussion about these two contrasting perspectives; moreover, it involves also the great alternative: whether the primal cause of existence could be either matter or spirit. And this question cannot, by sheer evidence, be given a “scientific answer” ever.
The interest of the graphologist in these three great is not focused on their thought as much as on the instruments of self-expression that enabled them to leave a deep trace on ideologies, by unraveling their weak points and overthrowing cultural schemes universally accepted.
As revolutionaries in the ideas’ world, they brought about a cultural ferment which involved and inflamed both supporters and opponents. And even if no new approach can be seen as a product of a single mind, still a single individual ought to be the mind to express it and the voice to give it words, daring to say what, frequently, put at stake his career, respect and honorability.
The destiny these great shared was to express their explosive ideas, subsequently embraced by the masses. In doing this, these thinkers took advantage each of his specific assets, having no common scheme nor model; each lived intensely both his bright and shady points, his own way. Actually, their theories had become a doctrinal belief first, then finally a manifesto of materialistic reductionism: saying – as in Darwin – that human beings are no more than casual offspring fighting to survive, or – as in Freud – mere children whose destructive urges ought to be kept under control by a Father-God they invented, or – as in Marx – part of a world ruled exclusively by economic processes and all ideas, including religious beliefs, are necessary only to give formal dignity to a structure basically unfair to most of its members.
As graphologists, we wonder whether the scheme of thought, somehow rough, described above, really belonged in this form to the thinkers’ personalities or was otherwise simplified, as propaganda usually requires. However, a less obvious explanation can be considered, as we are going to describe in the following analysis.

This page has the following sub pages.