The Birth of the Living God

This is a well-written and accessible--to the layperson--account by Dr. Rizzuto of her study of religious beliefs and how they are formed. Her inquiry rests upon a particular psychoanalytic approach, object relations theory, but her observations are not parochial; their value is not restricted to those who hold to that theoretical position. She reviews Freud's views (negative)on religion and responds to them, out of her own experience with patients. Originally conceived for the purpose of instructing religious educators in the psychological processes that underlie the formation of beliefs--secular as well as religious--Dr. Rizzuto makes clear the importance--once again!--of parents, and other adults, to a child's development toward psychological maturity, sacred and profane.

This book was great and very insightful. I liked it very much. It gives a good idea about the etiology about how people form there concept of God. Its a good place to start looking at shaping of conscience and how it plays out in everyday life. I would certainly recommend this book to someone.

Was more marked up than, but a bonus, it arrive much sooner then expected!

Very pleased

In her book, The Birth of the Living God: a Psychoanalytic Study, Ana-Maria Rizzuto attempts to lay out her research on "the possible origins of the individual's private representation of God and its subsequent elaborations" (p. 3), or "the process of developing a belief in God" (p. viii). The question she seeks to address is, "How and why do people come to perceive God the way they do?" Her research relies primarily on the theory of object relations, to show how people look to God as a transitional object to fulfill a psychological need to relate to a primary object, such as a parent, which has meaning in their lives.Rizzuto spends a whole chapter on Freud's theory of psychoanalsysis in establishing the theoretical foundation of object relations theory and depth psychology.. While the research literature begins with Freud, who focused heavily on sex drives, it eventually shifts more to object relations, and the human need for attachment to those objects. Rizzuto attempts to differentiate her theory from Freud by expanding the primary relationship with a father to include any primary caregiver that a child can become attached to--this is a primary object. The research attempts to look at how the development of the relationship with the primary object correlates with the transitional object that represents God. First, a life history is taken to find out what were positive and traumatic experiences, and to determine how people felt about God during different developmental periods. Second, a spiritual history is taken to record a person's religious experiences from childhood to present.Freudian psychoanalytical theory has lost popularity and is practically abandoned by the wayside in recent years. Some of the criticisms leveled against psychoanalysis include: 1) it overemphasizes sexual factors, 2) it is unduly pessimistic about human nature (too selfish), 3) critics assert that most human functioning is under control of rational, conscious processes, rather than being controlled by unconscious forces, 4) it neglects cultural differences, and 5) there is little or no empirical evidence to support many psychoanalytic assumptions (Dennis Thombs, 1999). Psychoanalytic theory can be useful with trained therapists and can have a place. However, it can also be easy for a therapist to find what he or she is looking for (eisegesis), rather than listening to the clients' own interpretation, since the therapist approaches the client as the expert. Psychoanalysis has not been held to a high standard of empirical, non-subjective research (Nichols, 2006). While object relations theory has formally moved away as a separate approach from psychoanalysis, it appears that Rizzuto does not stray too far from Freud's thinking, except for the expansion of the primary object and her final conclusion. Thus, her research seems to share the same weaknesses, such as the lack for empirical evidence and subjectivity.Relying primarily on qualitative research through case studies, Rizzuto's research does not use any quantitative research methods and is prone to subjectivity. First, it is subjective in its reliance on participant's memories since this is not a longitudinal study. It is true that the internal world is never going to correspond exactly with the external world and actual life experiences, and that what really matters is what appears to be reality to the individual. However, a person's memory can also not correspond to a person's own past experiences. Memories can be constructed differently based on a person's attitude at the time and may not accurately reflect what a person felt while actually going through the different life experiences. There would automatically be a higher correlation just because of the use of memory. Second, the research is subjective in the reliance on the researcher's own interpretations, which can introduce bias. The interpreter may attempt to read into the stories (eisegesis) what she is looking for. There is no comparison with neutral or unbiased psychoanalytical interpreters. There are no statistics presented, though Rizzuto tries to excuse it based on the nature of the study. However, quantitative data can and should be collected when possible to avoid subjectivity. Finally, the sample size of twenty (20) seems to be a bit low, particularly for a survey study that is not longitudinal. Also, the fact that the sample draws upon hospital patients, being asked to rely on their memories in a time of stress, may damage its external validity since the results would hardly represent the real world. If I was to do this psychoanalytical study, I would use quantitative methods either in a longitudinal or a cross-sectional study format, on a sample size appropriate for the format.The book seemed to overflow with unnecessary jargon. I appreciate the need to be technical, but at some point, excessive jargon is a sign of poor writing skills and the need for the author to prove herself and to make up for the lack of data.Rizzuto's research also seems to neglect cultural differences, coming from a strictly Western perspective. The research does not account for those who believe in an impersonal "force" (pantheism) or multiple gods (polytheism), where attachment to a primary object would not seem to be a sufficient reason.Nevertheless, Rizzuto concludes that humans need a transitional object to help them function properly, like an emotional teddy bear. Children are born into a "mythological context of dreams and wishes" and this "mythology will be utilized by the child for his own God representation" (p. 183). However, while Freud would dismiss God and religion as "wishful childish illusion," Rizzuto disagrees, saying that "men cannot be men without illusions" (p. 209). Her research seems to confirm the old notion that people relate to God like a parent and God can fill a void in the mind. As Joseph Campbell wrote, "Myths derive from the visions of people searching their own most inward world" (2001). Myth helps us to function and have meaning in a meaningless world.While I sympathize with Freud's idea that in a psychological perspective, "man created God in his image," I would say that it is because humans want to or need to perceive God in their own image. We may find it easier to relate to a Higher Power that is invisible by relating in a way that is familiar to us.ReferencesCampbell, J. (2001). Thou art that: Transforming religious metaphor. Novato, CA: New World Library.Nichols, M. P. & Schwartz, R. C. (2006). Family therapy: concepts and methods (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.Rizzuto, A. (1979). The birth of the living God: A psychoanalytic study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Thombs, D. L. (1999) Introduction to addictive behaviors. (Second edition) New York: The Guilford Press.

Rizzuto's theory, a revision of Freud's thinking on religion (jettisoning most of the implausible stuff) and an integration with Winnicott's thinking on object relations, is a superb source of inspiration for empirical research in psychology of religion. Or rather -- it *ought* to be a source of inspiration, but has largely been neglected with the exception of a line of work by researchers such as Todd Hall and Glendon Moriarty. I read it while at graduate school and still found it accessible despite coming from an experimental psychology background that included no courses on Freud or psychodynamic psychology. The points of connection with attachment theory and social cognition, while not made by Rizzuto (she was writing in 1979, after all), are plain to see for anyone also familiar with those areas. I don't know if she is right in what she proposes, but it's certainly a compelling story and set of hypotheses, and one that deserves wider empirical attention.

Excellent product thanks

Als Leser muss man viel Geduld aufbringen, da alle Sachverhalte, Überlegungen und Untersuchungsvoraussetzungen sowie die Untersuchungsergebnisse immer wieder erörtert werden. Inhaltlich sind die klinischen Untersuchungen und die Ergebnisse ganz interessant und ihre Deutung im Rahmen der - letztlich inzwischen sehr veralteten und überholten - psychoanalytischen Theorie schlüssig.