The essay Eros and Civilization by Herbert Marcuse connects the tradition of critical theory and Marxist social criticism with the statements of psychoanalytic theory, as a direct response to Freud's essay Civilization and its Discontents. Marcuse emphasizes in the introduction that the purpose of the essay is "to contribute to the philosophy of psychoanalysis - not to psychoanalysis itself."
The aim of Eros and Civilization is to describe the contradictions of modern social conditions by means of a dialectically proceeding method that grasps the depths of our culture and, in particular, to shed light on the connection between subject and sociality in a theoretically ambitious process. Marcuse also tries to extract from the critical analysis of the given possibilities of a liberated society and a liberated subjectivity. This is his positive blueprint of future social relations. He claims that it is not a utopia he is suggesting, but rather to find approaches to future liberation in the constitution of social reality and the human individual. Marcuse outlined a society in which economic and social progress would make it possible to harmonize reason and eros: eros, culture, art and human happiness would be vitalized, repressive painful work would no longer be necessary.
Summary
I. Under the rule of the reality principle
According to Freud, the condition for the creation of a culture and the establishment of stable social relationships is the suppression of destructive and antisocial drives . The original pleasure principle, aimed at the immediate and complete satisfaction of the instinctual wishes, comes under the control of the reality principle under the influence of a reality shaped by material deficiency. The fulfillment of instinctual wishes is postponed under the effect of social domination, thereby creating the conscious, thinking and remembering subject. The pleasure principle is repressed into the unconscious and only the imagination does not come under the rule of the reality principle . The suppression of the pleasure principle, however, weakens the eros in favor of the destructive tendency of Thanatos and thus leads to the sociopathological dynamics of modern societies such as war and mass murder.
In contrast to Freud, however, Marcuse sees the ananke (lack of life), under the influence of which the repression of the instincts develops, as a historically contingent fact and not as a timeless condition of human existence per se. The historically predominant form of the reality principle is the achievement principle. The pleasure principle is limited in time to leisure time and spatially to genitality. This frees up a large part of the time and the human body for the performance of alienated work, so man can reproduce himself and his social environment under conditions of natural deficiency. In the current phase, the performance principle is shaped by the requirements of productive efficiency and competition. The alienated worknow creates degrees of freedom itself, above all freedom from natural constraints and thus indirectly serves the pleasure principle, albeit at the price of an oppressive culture.
Marcuse coined the term surplus repression, which is not absolutely necessary for the existence of culture, but serves to organize the rule of man over man. In the course of history this rule is overcome again and again through revolutionary processes, but is immediately rebuilt because the subjects identify the rule with the existence of a life-securing order par excellence through internalized oppression. This creates a double feeling of guilt through betraying the rule and one's own desires for freedom.
II. Beyond the reality principle
However, by increasing productivity in alienated work, the reality principle creates the conditions throughout history for the prevailing form of the reality principle to be abolished. “The more complete the alienation , the greater the potential of freedom.” Marcuse sees a historical phase in which people can determine their needs themselves. By automating production, the alienated work that is still essential to life could be limited to a minimum in terms of time. Eros would be freed from its destructive restraints to a great extent. However, a precondition for this would be the renunciation of the standard of living that has been achieved in the western world.
In contrast to Freud, Marcuse assumes that such a liberated eros would not lead to the downfall of culture, on the contrary: “The liberation of eros could create new, lasting work relationships.” It would lead to a self- sublimation of sexuality, the more cultivated one Would enable relationships between individuals. Marcuse assumes a libidinal one inherent in Eros morality, which after the abolition of the additional oppression and the associated forms of rule could lead to the development of a liberated indevidual.