Here again I will take a single fact as my starting point. Primitive
races fear a punishment for the violation of a taboo, usually a serious
disease or death. This punishment threatens only him who has been guilty
of the violation. It is different with the compulsion neurosis. If the
patient wants to do something that is forbidden to him he does not fear
punishment for himself, but for another person. This person is usually
indefinite, but, by means of analysis, is easily recognized as some one
very near and dear to the patient. The neurotic therefore acts as if he
were altruistic, while primitive man seems egotistical. Only if
retribution fails to overtake the taboo violator spontaneously does a
collective feeling awaken among savages that they are all threatened
through the sacrilege, and they hasten to inflict the omitted punishment
themselves. It is easy for us to explain the mechanism of this
solidarity. It is a question of fear of the contagious example, the
temptation to imitate, that is to say, of the capacity of the taboo to
infect. If some one has succeeded in satisfying the repressed desire,
the same desire must manifest itself in all his companions; hence, in
order to keep down this temptation, this envied individual must be
despoiled of the fruit of his daring. Not infrequently the punishment
gives the executors themselves an opportunity to commit the same
sacrilegious act by justifying it as an expiation. This is really one of
the fundamentals of the human code of punishment which rightly presumes
the same forbidden impulses in the criminal and in the members of
society who avenge his offence.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account