Criticism and argument

In a way exactly opposite to Darwin’s, Freud is exceptional, bright in polemic and deeply lacking in aptitude for criticism and self-criticism.
When in 1938, after extenuating international negotiations, Freud was allowed to leave Vienna to expatriate, he had in return to undersign a declaration to have been treated fairly by the Gestapo. Freud signed, but added by his own hand: “I can strongly recommend the Gestapo to everybody”. No need to point out that joking with the Nazis was very dangerous, at that time; moreover, he was known as “the founder of Jewish psychoanalysis” and all of his four sister died in an internment camp.
However, the Nazis had to take his joke, because, though sarcastic and pungent in its meaning, still it was formally flawless. Sharp intelligence, if original like Freud’s and furthermore inclined to psychology, gives the mind not only the skill and predilection for polemic oratory, but also the inclination to see readily the vulnerable part in everything.
Freud saw clearly, for instance, a falsification in an idealistic direction done to the human image by culture and religion of the age and unmasked its hypocrisy, false morality and exaggerated sentimentality, proceeding like only sharp intelligence can, by means of powerful unilateral attacks, as only so he could root himself on such an hostile environment; he did not do it as an old-time prophet carrying difficult truth, but as a scientist speaking in the name of rational, demonstrated truth, according to the need of our age, whereas something is defined “scientific”, then it is considered correct.
His “science”, bravely unilateral, originated an incredible cultural ferment, whose crop we are still reaping; as psychoanalysis laid the foundation of today’s psychotherapy, therefore the aspiration – we may say, very idealistic and Enlightenment – to heal diseases with words, because however irrational a human mind may seem, still it has got some light inside, and this light can be contacted if understood through its symbolic language and innermost reasons.
Of course, the discovery of this part of human psyche couldn’t be the legacy just of a single man, as Freud claimed to himself. His extreme rooting in himself didn’t allow him, for instance, to accept all creativity coming from others, and made him shut in a fortress where only his followers could get in. Obvious limits in a sharp intelligence. However, weren’t he as rooted in himself as he actually was, maybe he couldn’t have carried such difficult truth in the world, without being devastated himself. Furthermore, it hasn’t been recognized yet, for instance, this disrupting issue of this psychoanalysis message: no real progress will ever take place till each individual, each conscience won’t get back his own shadow and quit projecting it onto others.
Whenever evil is perceived as only external, Freud’s questions and his investigations on removal and projection will make the difference.