Eric Fromm: Primal Psychologist

The emerging Primal episteme (Birkin & Polesie 2011) is based upon a new possibility of knowledge (Foucault 1970).  Science now provides a view of the origins of the world and of ourselves that simply was not available when the Modern episteme or age was established. The transition from Modern to Primal can be summarised as going from 

• abstract knowledge belief systems in Modern human sciences produced by and for mankind (which provides an epistemological or knowledge foundation); to
• trust in the findings of empirically-grounded science that so accurately and thoroughly describes and explains our world and ourselves (which provides an ontological or “being” foundation).

This kind of epistemic transition is not “forced” upon a recalcitrant mankind that has to obey its new sets of rules.  It is rather an opportunity for new ways of thinking about ourselves and the world that are created by pioneers who adopt the new episteme. They have adopted new epistemes in the past usually without using any kind of epistemic analysis knowledge or methods. They simply flourished and enthusiastically used the fresh insights that the "new episteme" provided in their own areas of knowledge to carve out a different kind of world, a whole new world.

Erich Seligmann Fromm (1900-1980) was one such pioneer of the emerging Primal episteme. Among the many properties of the emerging Primal episteme, Birkin & Polesie (2011) identify deep embeddedness or unity of all things in the natural world. It is reality that unifies in the Primal episteme and this cuts across the analytical divisions and separations of the Modern; so too for Erich Fromm.

Fromm was a German social psychologist, humanist, democratic socialist and author of many books. As far as PR is aware, Fromm never wrote anything at all about epistemic analysis but nonetheless his work can be understood as a radical and unbridled exploration of a Primal psychology and sociology. In his book On Being Human, Fromm wrote:

"I believe that the man choosing progress can find a new unity through the development of all his human forces, which are produced in three orientations. These can be presented separately or together: biophilia, love for humanity and nature, and independence and freedom."

 (Fromm 1997, p. 101)

We can observe that in the above passage Fromm may be identified as being Primal for the following reasons.

1.  “a new unity” – the Primal episteme is of course new and it emphasises the unity to be found in reality now described by empirically grounded science. 
2. “development of all his human forces” – which implies that in the still dominant Modern age, not all human forces are developed and this is to be anticipated by the Modern episteme’s foundation in knowledge of the human sciences which was made for and by thereby producing a kind of species-solipsism which can only be debilitating.
3. “biophilia” – which literally refers to a "love of life or living systems" or being attracted to all that is alive and vital which is a clear statement that Fromm regards mankind as being psychologically dependent upon other living things. E.O. Wilson (1984), the Harvard biologist, perhaps more famously uses the same word “biophilia” to mean "the connections that human beings subconsciously seek with the rest of life”. Wilson further proposes that the deep affiliations humans have with nature are rooted in our biology and this radical proposition very clearly and firmly embeds mankind’s psyche and psychology in the natural world, a profound Primal observation.
4. “love for humanity and nature” – may seem a tautology given Fromm’s definition of “biophilia” but that is not the case if we understand “biophilia” as psychological orientation which finds expression in love for humanity and nature. A distinction reinforced by considering the practical, caring side of love for this proposition then flies in the face of the Modern attitude to nature expressed by business and accounting which in fact does (or did not) recognise nature as “nature” but rather as “resource to be exploited”.
5.  “independence and freedom” – is superficially a weak point of differentiation with the Modern episteme and its emphasis on “Free Markets” but a moment’s reflection to consider just what it is that Fromm is giving independence and freedom to shows that this is not the case. The Modern episteme’s sense of freedom in a Capitalist society reduces to the freedom to shop and, more importantly, the freedom for capital to flow wherever and to do whatever it pleases. Fromm wants an independence and freedom for man-as-part-of-nature and that is very different from the Modern and is profoundly Primal.

Erich Fromm - a Primal psychologist and true Human Being

A Primal understanding is evident throughout Fromm’s work. His eight basic needs for example could easily find a place in the Intrinsic Sustainable Development book:

1.       Relatedness - Relationships with others, care, respect, knowledge.

2.       Transcendence - Being thrown into the world without their consent, humans have to transcend their nature by destroying or creating people or things. Humans can destroy through malignant aggression, or killing for reasons other than survival, but they can also create and care about their creations.

3.       Rootedness - Rootedness is the need to establish roots and to feel at home again in the world.

4.       Sense of Identity - The drive for a sense of identity is expressed non-productively as conformity to a group and productively as individuality.

5.       Frame of orientation - Understanding the world and our place in it.

6.       Excitation and Stimulation - Actively striving for a goal rather than simply responding.

7.       Unity - A sense of oneness between one person and the "natural and human world outside."

8.       Effectiveness - The need to feel accomplished.

Finally, a central tenet of Primal living is to shift from having more to being more. In his book “To Have or to Be?” (1976), Fromm distinguishes between having and being as follows. Modern society has become materialistic and prefers having to being. Consequently whilst Modern industrialization has made great promises which have been developed to fulfil people’s material interest in having interests and increase their possessions, they have subsequently lost sight of who they are. Fromm argues that  In every mode of life people should ponder more on their "being" nature and not their "having" nature. This is the truth which people deny and hence people of Modern world have completely lost their inner selves.

The consequences of this misplaced sense of “having” and not “being” were immense for Fromm, just as they are for PR. In the industrial age, Fromm argued, the development of an economic system was no longer determined by the question that what is good for man, rather what is good for the growth of the system; i.e. the “having” nature had replaced the “being” nature.

 “Right living is no longer only the fulfilment of an ethical or religious demand. For the first time in history the physical survival of the human race depends on a radical change of the human heart.”

-          Erich Fromm in the Introduction to “To Have or to be” (1976).

References

Birkin, F.K. and Polesie, T. (2011). Intrinsic Sustainable Development: epistemes, science, business and sustainability. Singapore, World Scientific Press.

Foucault, M. (1970). The Order of Things. London, Routledge.

Fromm, E. (1976). To Have or to Be? London, Continuum Books.

Fromm, E. (1997[1991]). On Being Human.  London, The Continuum International Publishing Group.

Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.