Christianity. The great universal neurosis, whose pathological fear is that its castles-in-the-air will be brought tumbling down by the vision of reality. If Christians had wanted to discredit their faith, they could not have thought of a better way; by their intolerance they laid themselves open to Freud's mocking taunt of “Neurosis!”. Freud undermined their protestations of belief, by showing a deeper reality; the reality of psychological disease. I, for one, am glad he did.
Freud actually is a bit unfair. It is always a nightmare when the castles in one's mind come tumbling down. The disillusioned Communist shares the agony of the disillusioned Christian. Once a person asks, “What is life about; what are we here for?”, all he can do, by way of an answer, is to put such beliefs as he has into practice. The great likelihood is that they will not measure up to life as it really is; yet as Madame Bovary found out, a person cannot throw away his or her beliefs however absurd, until circumstances compel. If you do, you become a slut. You are forced to cling to your beliefs, whatever those beliefs are. So whatever the beliefs, the process by which those beliefs are modified by experience is bound to be a spiritual dismemberment, a crucifixion. Once a man dares to answer the question, “What is life about?”, the road thereafter for communist, humanist, and christian alike is the way of the cross. Only those who live for the moment escape; and they do not live.
I am confident therefore, that there is nothing in this theory of consciousness incompatible with orthodox Christianity. But equally, in the nature of things, there is nothing in it that suggests that Christianity is true. The presence or absence of God must be discovered by trying to put religion into practice.
Yet I would make one comment. Like normally begets like. It would be strange if blind impersonal evolutionary forces had of themselves begotten personality in man. If it is discovered that figs really have grown on thistles, …