Introduction
Freud’s assertion that psychology is an impossible profession is contradictory and needs to be analyzed. Freud clearly points to the repressive function of educational mechanisms, and thus argues that the child cannot be taught, it can only be forced. Obviously, education means social constraint that the child must impose on himself in order to better maneuver within society (Freud, 1991). Thus, the role of the teacher is actually not to give new knowledge, but to prohibit or eradicate the more uncontrolled activity of the child (Freud, 1969). However, the connection of psychoanalysis and the learning process is still potentially possible, at least through the inclusion of Freudian theories in the preparation of educational events.
Discussion
One might assume that the child is not capable of taking in Freud’s theories and somehow translating them into reality. This does not change the fact that such a psychoanalytic mechanism should be tried on by the teacher in such a way that they understand the possible psychological implications of their own activities (Hook & Watts, 2009). The psychoanalysis of an educational specialist can be a very important step towards a balanced educational process in which there will be no place, for example, for repressed aspirations or desires that are forced out on children by a teacher.
Post-Freudian educational theorists point out that psychoanalysis, like the process of education, must potentially serve the same purpose, that is, to establish control of the ego over the id. Bettelheim (1969) notes the paradoxical echoes of Freud’s teachings with theories of education, but at the same time he notes that in practice the unification of these two theories is almost impossible. The unconscious currents prevailing in the non-adult personality must gradually become aware of the clarity of the intrinsic ego and obey it. Therefore, the problem of teachers using psychoanalytic theories often lies in the lack of understanding that the manifestations of the unconscious in a child are not a sign of adequate education. It is not uncommon for educators to believe that outbursts of energy and out-of-control behavior are tantamount to self-discovery through self-expression. However, in essence, such energy impulses are not synchronous with the idea of a psychoanalytic process of self-knowledge. The child does not learn in this way to understand his internal movements, but rather loses the ability to control them.
Another example of a negative understanding of Freud’s theories on education is the problem of student motivation. For example, there are cases when teachers misunderstood what makes children interested in the process of acquiring knowledge. It was not uncommon for teachers to become frustrated with their students and their teaching activities because they were unable to keep students motivated on a long-term basis. The pedagogical problem of such disappointment lies in the lack of familiarity with Freud’s theories, in particular with the pleasure principle in the rational world. It should be understood that in the modern world overflowing with all sorts of choices, pleasures and attractions, the problem of forming a motivated personality is quite strong. For example, a child may be inclined to make the simplest decisions guided by superficial and momentary desires. This is due to the fact that the motivation for the ego no longer seems significant enough to the child, which is why children are not able to force themselves to learn lessons in the long term.
In the past, when religion played a more fundamental role in Western society, people’s motivation to act was a sacred reward in the long run. This allowed people to work selflessly and ascetically restrain themselves in pleasures and needs, comforting themselves with the hope of happiness and bliss in the afterlife. Their second motivation was the fear of punishment in hell, which triggered the processes of the superego, which also gave motivation for action and work. In the modern world, such motivation cannot be long-term, and the promise of a reward for learning, which is guaranteed to be but in the extremely long term, no longer seems to be satisfactory for children. Therefore, the problem of the modern teacher lies in the impossibility of starting in the child the process of realizing the real inner need for the knowledge received, which is followed by disappointment.
Education cannot be obtained by a child who is strictly guided by the principle of pleasure, that is, who is engaged in lessons to the extent that he is interested in it. A teacher may certainly take pride in drawing attention to the subject he is expounding to the student, but this spark of interest is not enough to trigger the psychological drive for education (Bojesen, 2019). In this impossibility of the natural generation of motivation, Freud obviously observed the problem of this profession. The educational process is also difficult to combine with the problem of internal and external social development of the child. Psychoanalysis as a discipline tends to destroy the internal barriers within a person, to identify and neutralize his subconscious passions and control mechanisms repressed in the superego (Mayes, 2020). At the same time, it is practically impossible to force this control mechanism out of the child, because there is a risk that only pure manifestations of the unconscious will remain in its place.
The process of education in the official tradition implies familiarity with external rules and restrictions imposed by society. Psychoanalysis, on the other hand, is largely aimed at revealing their artificiality, making a person stop attaching such great importance to them in order to develop a fixed internal neurosis (Felman, 1982). In essence, education enslaves creativity and makes natural children more obedient and controllable. Psychoanalysis, on the other hand, is rather the next stage in the development of a person, when the imposed restrictions that produce a enslaving impression are removed as internally imposed.
Modern psychologists often emphasize the task of education as something similar to the essence of psychoanalysis. Britzman (2009) is perceiving the work of a teacher as a remedy for individuality, and the process of combining knowledge with desire. Education can be likened to the process of knowing oneself, since it also includes a feeling of inferiority, work with an excessive complex of informational variables (Britzman, 2021). Thus, the connection of psychoanalysis to the educational process could remove the fear of knowing the world, forcing the student to look at his ego from the outside.
The theory of education in connection with psychology can also acquire forms that differ from Freud’s theoretical prism. A prime example of child educational psychology in practice is the theory of Jean Piaget, who spent decades striving to find the key to the educational process for children. He paid attention not to individual differences between children, but to similar logical patterns in their thinking, which he called patterns (Furth, 1971). Gradually, the psychology of the child is built in this way as the realization that around them are objects that exist separately from themselves. These structures form the intellect, which exists as a complex network of regularities in behavior.
At the same time, Piaget observes the difference between training and education, arguing that education is not capable of forming experiential knowledge in a child. Thus, in this there is a certain confirmation of Freud’s idea that it is impossible to teach a child, since only the child learns and develops by himself through contact with objects. However, the teaching of moral principles, which Freud spoke more about in connection with education, works somewhat differently. The child tends to repeat the world of adults and therefore does not understand the relativity of actions depending on the context. Therefore, bad deeds are perceived by the child from the point of view of deviation from the norm, regardless of motivation (Furth, 1971). This emphasizes the need for communication and cooperation in the process of understanding the world, otherwise the system will be perceived solely as a limiter and not as a rationally operating moral mechanism.
Conclusion
Despite the fact that the process of education is an act of oppression of the child and oppression of their potential, its role for society is rather important and necessary than vice versa. Freud did not believe that the manifestation of libido in a child should be freely encouraged, but at the same time he was aware that its suppression did not solve the problem. Thus, the impossibility of this process with all reality does not require the rejection of this task. On the contrary, modern researchers are in constant search for hybrid models of education and psychoanalysis, which would take into account the shortcomings of both disciplinary and society. Pedagogy should be non-reactive but penetrating and focused on continuous improvement, so experimental combinations of education and psychoanalysis seem not only possible but potentially useful.
Reference List
Bettelheim, B. (1969)’Psychoanalysis and education,’ The School Review, 77(2).
Bojesen, E. (2019) Forms of education: rethinking educational experience against and outside the humanist legacy. London: Routledge.
Britzman, D. (2009) The very thought of education: psychoanalysis and the impossible professions. Albany: State University Press.
Britzman, D. (2021). Anticipating education: concepts for imagining pedagogy with psychoanalysis. Gorham: Myers Education Press.
Felman, S. (1982) ‘Psychoanalysis and education: Teaching terminable and interminable’, Yale French Studies 63, pp. 21-44.
Freud, S. (1991) Introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Freud, S. (1969) An outline of psycho-analysis. London: Hogarth Press
Furth, H. G. (1971) Piaget for teachers. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Mayes, C. (2020). Archetype, culture, and the individual in education: the three pedagogical narratives. London: Routledge.
Watts, J., Cockcroft, K. & Duncan, N. (2009) Developmental psychology. Lansdowne: UCT Press.