The mother archetype is a vast and central theme. A tour of the artifacts of ancient history will reveal the consistency of the mother. Mesopotamians represented the mother as a goddess of fertility. She is, materialistically speaking, the place from which each of us emerged from. And this perennial and deeply rooted theme makes the mother a diverse and powerful image.

The “great mother” archetype is the furthest way from consciousness; she represents an undifferentiated, non-dualistic state of being, in which all opposites are contained. The qualities associated with this image are absent of distinction between good and evil, life and death.

It is the personal mother which overlays this archetypal backdrop. The individual’s genetically determined personality traits, in combination with their mother’s own personality and approach to parenting, effect the psychological make-up of each individual. There are typical patterns that Jung has described.

The anima is a label which reckons with an area of contents, nearing consciousness, which the male ego cannot yet integrate. It is the counterpart to the ego’s abilities and understandings, representing in female form. It is observed in Jungian dream analysis that:

Because of the difference in sex, a son’s mother-complex does not appear in pure form. This is the reason why in every masculine mother-complex, side by side with the mother archetype, a significant role is played by the image of the man’s sexual counterpart, the anima. [5]

The animus is the counterpart to the female ego, and mediates the contents of the unconscious, often in the image of a man.

Depending on the development of the ego, and the influences of the personal parents, the anima and animus may have a more or less unruly effect on one’s thoughts.

The peur aeternus, is a term, derived from mythology, that is used to encompass a general typology, which has been observed by psychoanalysts. The peur aeternus is an archetype, and therefore just one aspect of the unconscious, by which an individual is overly-identified with and therefore lives out, at a detriment to the potential fullness of their personality and ego development.

For the male psyche, a peur aeternus is characterized by a psyche overly influenced by the mother complex. The complex represents the entire psychological system by which the personal and archetypal associations and imprints are bound and active.

For the female psyche, the peulla aeternus, has an overly influential, and unintegrated animus. The resulting affects of these two influences, on the given genders, are similar, in that a full commitment to life — work, relationships and parenting — ranges from difficult to impossible.

Eduard Edinger, a Jungian analyst and writer explains that the “danger for the son, in the mother complex, is that it will poison his masculine urge to engage life; and that for the daughter, the danger of the father complex is that it will corrupt her relation to spirit or to meaning. These are the perils of the infantile relation to the anima or animus.” [6]

Both the animus of the puella, and the mother complex of the man often induce an eery detachment, either through intellectualization or vast, disregarding complaints.

2. Anti-Natalism Argument and Depth Psychology

a. Cold Rationality

Unbridled logic can become neurotic. Isolated, cold reasoning can detach itself from life and become a modality which is capable of constructing intricate reasons for pathological attitudes, transforming weakness into the illusion of strong and worthy beliefs.

Anti-Natalism is a philosophy that claims to answer all of big and little questions. Once subscribed to, all of experiential, incarnated life is reduced to two categories. In Benatar’s thinking, all subjective valuing of life and its worthiness are discounted. In his article on Aeon.com, Benatar supposes an objective lens, which, of course, the rest of us tend to ignore:

“Many desires are never satisfied. And even when they are satisfied, it is often after a long period of dissatisfaction. Nor does satisfaction last, for the satisfaction of a desire leads to a new desire – which itself needs to be satisfied sometime in the future. When one can fulfill one’s more basic desires, such as hunger, on a regular basis, higher-level desires arise. There is a treadmill and an escalator of desire. In other words, life is a state of continual striving. ” [7]

It is this reality of striving — the bad outweighing the good — which Benatar reduces life to. He argues that our instinctual psychology counteracts an acknowledgment of this reality. Conversely, it is possible that Benatar’s psychology distorts life coldly.

Jungian psychologist, Marie-Louis Von Franz wrote a book on The Problem of the Peur Aeternus. She writes that many of this type tend to “escape into the realm of philosophy. Such people prefer philosophy, pedagogy, metaphysics and theology, and it is a completely un-vital, bloodless business.” [8] From her experience, it is the influence of the mother archetype, which is driving a man towards such endeavors. This is distinct from a philosophy or moral understanding which accepts and engages with life; it is only the case with those beliefs which smartly find an excuse, a reason why living is irrational.

Von Franz cites the mythological representation of this in the form of “the great mother image who asks torturing questions of those who want to remain innocent.” [9]

For example, “The motif of the Sphinx who propounds the riddle, leads to an essential problem which is widespread. It has to do with what I call pseudo-philosophy, the wrong kind of intellectualism induced by the mother complex.

Benatar cheerfully ponders the day when humans will become extinct and gleefully mentions that “it would be better, all things being equal, if this happened sooner rather than later.” It is this exact type of cynicism about human existence, and the desire to return to the totality of the mother archetype, which is characteristic of the intellectual puer aeternus.

3. The Lack of Eros

The comfortability in intellectualization and rationalization is an outcome of lack of feeling. It is feeling which defies objectivity and reductionism; feeling is personal and specific to one’s own life. It is the quality of one’s feeling towards projects and relationships that gives meaning to life.

In Jungian psychology, the terms "Logos" and "Eros" stand for two modalities of being. Logos function is associated with thinking, and stands also for the inherited ways of a culture — that is laws. Eros has to do with feeling, and our relatedness to each other and nature. The Logos is associated with the archetypal masculine, and the Eros with the archetypal feminine.

Typically speaking, because the female ego is identified with her femininity, her Eros comes naturally; for the man it is opposite.

a. Eros and Logos and the Unconscious Complexes

In the male psychology of the puer aeturnus, Eros may be entirely lacking, or passive. Edinger explains the case of an infantile relationship to the feminine in a man:

“His Eros is passive like a child's; he hopes to be caught, sucked in, enveloped, and devoured. He seeks, as it were, the protecting, nourishing, charmed circle of the mother, the condition of the infant released from every care, in which the outside world bends over him and even forces happiness upon him.”

This situation often comes across practically in a complaining about the struggles of life, and an unwillingness to accept pain and strife as part of what it means to be truly alive.

Although a woman’s strong Eros will allow her to consciously have a sense of personal feeling towards her place in the world and relationship to others, unconscious complexes can still impose in other ways. This can be seen in a pessimistic attitude that classifies everything in extremes — an either/or, with no middle ground.

Both of these types, as eternal children, unconsciously devalue the nuances of life, and make the type of overreaching, sweeping statements that are throughout Benatar’s writing and interviews.

The philosophy of Anti-Natalism is completely devoid of Eros, the highest form of which is represented as Sophia: “She is an intuit of love towards mankind, which naturally means being human among other human beings and loving them. That is the highest form of eros.” [10]

b. Avoidance

And so, it can be seen in a philosophy such David Benatar’s that Eros can displaced by pure Logos. The dedication, in Benatar’s first book, points to the hidden feeling that our personal lives and relationships are meaningful. To argue that our lives were better never have to been, means to undervalue what it means to be together, to commit to one another. Further, Anti-Natalism rests on an undervaluation of the instinct to have children of our own, and to commit ourselves to that process. The former, a feeling attitude, and the former, a natural process, are both contained in the Eros which is apparently lacking in Benatar’s psychological outlook.

This is why the absence of any mention of a wife is important. Theoretically, because a typical woman is more in touch with her Eros, a marital relationship balances out what had been lacking in the man. The peur aeternus avoid marriage, because his Eros, his love and feeling, is tied up with either the mother. This tangle, has simultaneous aspects of the feminine archetype functioning: The real life woman would be his vehicle towards overcoming the mother complex, while it is the mother archetype itself which imposes the block.

There are a whole slew of nuances at this point, because whatever woman a man comes into contact with, will have her own unconsciousness as well. Von Franz explains how, in many cases, women respond to a man with a mother complex by taking on the devouring role. This creates a cycle, whereby a man is affirmed by his initial excuse, and runs off.

It is this escaping that characterizes the puer aeternus, and which continues his life-abating ways. Von Franz explains that, if one is not living completely, then one “can be pretty sure that either the animus or the anima has put something between you and reality in a very clever way. With a woman, it is the animus who whispers something at the back of her mind, some kind of ‘nothing but’ remark.” [11]

The implementation of Anti-Natalism in an individual psychology would promote animus ideas like:

“It’s nothing but another cycle of desire, gratification, and another desire.”

“It’s nothing but another day which is not worth living, because it was too much pain.”

It also promotes mother complex narratives like:

“I would get married, but it creates more problems then it’s worth.”

“It would be worth trying, but this entire world is so messed up, so there’s no point.”

c. Statistical Thinking

The book “Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming Into Existence” and Benatar’s other work, rests on the basis that individually and generally, life is, on average, more suffering than good. As already mentioned, the binary reductionism is problematic. Additionally, the beliefs that construct Anti-Natalist consistently focus on dry calculations of suffering vs. pleasure.

Benatar supports his case that life is predominately misery with statistics: War-related injuries led to 310,000 deaths in 2000; about 40 million children are maltreated each year. [12]

Further, in speaking of individuals, he cites the fact that “rape” and “major depressive disorders” are underreported. “Even if we take the low estimates, in the cumulative risks of all the different misfortunes that can befall people, the odds are stacked deeply against any child.” [13]

These are strong points, and awareness of the burden of parenting should be more widespread. However, the effect of this far-reaching philosophy on the intellect, is that of dismissing life’s troubles. Carl Jung speaks of wounds — that is these horrible circumstances — and so-called neurosis, as material for transformation. In Jungian philosophy, the process of individuation is one in which life is enriched by way of confrontation with the unconscious, which holds our traumas. From this, one can emerge whole and find vitality in incarnated interrelatedness.

Benatar’s views, so dependent on labels and statistics, diminishes this potential for immense individual resiliency and transformation.

Von Franz explains further:

“To think of oneself in a statistical way is most destructive to the process of individuation, because it makes everything relative. It is completely destructive poison, and what is worse is that it is not true; it is a falsified image of reality. If we begin to think statistical, we begin to think against our own uniqueness. But it is not only thinking but a way of feeling.”

“A statistical mood is overwhelmed by the manifoldness and ordinariness of life. This is wrong, because statistics are built up on probability, which is only one way of explaining reality, and as we know, there is just as much uniqueness and irregularity.”

There is a lack of distinction in the propagation of Anti-Natalism, between consideration of the awfulness of so many situations in this world, which may in fact be better to avoid, from the lives of sufficient privilege, which, still not a paradise, still hold the opportunity for individuation and immense feeling of belonging and purpose.

a. Provisional Life

The personal implications of David Benatar’s ideas are revealed, in a stunning way, when he states repeatedly on the podcast that the possibility of suicide is always an option, even if life appears to be worth living for now. Marie-Louise Von Franz describes this as the “provisional life” and it is among the tendencies of the peur aeternus.

Although Benatar is an Anti-Natalist — believing it’s better not to have been born — he is not a Pro-Moralist — believing that it is best to commit suicide. However, his logic says that if “somebody’s life is not worth continuing, the bad things in life do need to be sufficiently bad to override the interest in not dying.” [14] The dramatic subjectivity over that decision becomes the crucial issue. And the pattern identified by Jungian psychologists, suggest that many people will unconsciously and consciously insist suicide is the answer. Benatar’s philosophy becomes an intellectual stamp-of-approval for those who have developed reasons why life isn’t worth it. This is especially so, because one’s current view could justify suicide, while baring through it could result in eventual renewal.

This notion that we should be looking to tomorrow, weighing the bad against the good, is typical of the peur aeternus, who “constantly plays with the idea of getting out of life if things get too hard.” [15]

Marie-Louis Von Franz goes onto explain how the mother complex effects a man’s commitment (although it could also be a woman’s animus talking):

“He is never quite committed to the situation as a whole human being; there is a constant mental reservation: ‘I will go into this, but I reserve my right as a human being to kill myself if I can’t stand it anymore. I shall not go through the whole experience to the bitter end if it becomes too insufferable, for if it does I shall walk out of it.”

It would be a shame for a young student of philosophy to become attracted to Anti-Natalism, which could emphasis such predilections. The concentration on pleasure and pain, also misses what Jungians find central to life. Practically speaking, following Jungian philosophy, an individual can continuously find the symbolic meaning in their life, which transcends the transient affects of pleasure and pain. Of course, this is only obtainable after certain base needs are met.

When an individual is reticent about committing fully to life, it “cuts off the wholeness of the experience, one cuts oneself into bits and remains split because transformation can only take place if one gives oneself completely to a situation.” [16]

b. Guilt of Living

Although Anti-Natalism can rightfully apply to people who have no means to reasonably support a child, Benatar extends it to all human life.

David Benatar writes extensively on the wastefulness and complicity in harm to the planet, other species and each other that a life entails. This is all true. This is the bargain of life — we are all wasteful to some degree or another.

Benatar shows an inability to accept the guilt of living. So, he sets up an either/or premise, which proposes: “Because life is a guilty business, we must end it.”

In Jungian psychology, the tension between the opposites is a central idea. The more mature an ego, the more it can hold the immense tension between disparate aspects of being. Carl Jung describes it best:

The one-after-another is a bearable pre-lude to the deeper knowledge of the side-by-side, for this is an incomparably more difficult problem. Again, the view that good and evil are spiritual forces outside us, and that man is caught in the conflict between them, is more bearable by far than the insight that the opposites are the ineradicable and indispensable preconditions of all psychic life, so much so that life itself is guilt.” [17]

If an individual expands their consciousness they are confronted with such massive problems as Benatar confronts. However, the mature ego will notice that a perfect world is a fantasy — an ancient vision of paradisiacal Eden. It is a compelling wish for the peur aeternus, because the mother archetype is strong in him, and the call to paradise is a call to the symbolic womb of the great mother.

Letting go of this fantasy, and overcoming the negative influence of the mother complex means accepting that, “Life is a double obligation, it is a conflict in itself — because it always means the collision, or conflict, of two tendencies.” [18] This could be, for example, the desire to be kind to animals and the planet, and yet feeling hungry for meat.

By abandoning the side-by-side, life itself (which is defined by such mixtures) also abandons the peur aeturnis. For those who cannot accept conflict and difficulty will abstain from experiencing a wife, and her pregnancy, a child, and the sacrifice and maturity that such a task demands.

It takes strength and depth to watch a child suffer with flu, or a broken leg, but to know that one is strong enough to let that pass and do one’s best to help a soul flower in this world. Benatar's philosophy does enough to recognize the immense suffering inherent in life, but his ethic is simple and limiting, denying and ascetic. He has rationalized a reason to remain in the ivory tower, cynically deferring life in the expectance of its inevitable ups and downs

8. Conclusions

In the course of this review, we have seen how Anti-Natalism is based on vast reductionism, which extrapolates subjective evaluations of life onto the masses. Because these views are inherently subjective, the personal psychology is important. Further, because philosophical ideas live in individual actors, it is important to analyze who is effected by Anti-Natalism and why. The contrast with Jungian ideas sheds light on the hyper-rational assertions by Benatar. And finally, the patterns of the peur aeturnus neurosis run throughout Bentar’s work.

Footnotes

1: Epicurus, "Letter to Menoeceus", contained in Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, Book X

2: David Benatar, Kids? Just Say No, Aeon.com, https://aeon.co/essays/having-children-is-not-life-affirming-its-immoral (2017)

3: Joshua Rothman, The Case For Not Being Born, NewYorker.com, https://www.newyorker.com/culture/persons-of-interest/the-case-for-not-being-born (2017)

4: Carl Jung, Collected Works Volume 9i, Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious, par. 91

5: Ibid, par. 162

6: Edward Edinger, The Aion Lectures, pg. 30 (Inner City Books, 1996)

7: David Benatar, Kids? Just Say No, Aeon.com, https://aeon.co/essays/having-children-is-not-life-affirming-its-immoral (2017)

8: Marie-Louis Von Franz, The Problem of the Puer Aeturnus, pg. 168 (Inner City Books, 2000)

9. Ibid, pg 167

10: Ibid, pg. 219

11: Ibid, pg. 89

12: Statistics in David Benatar’s book, as mentioned in the “Antinatalism” wikipedia entry, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism

13: David Benatar, Kids? Just Say No, Aeon.com, https://aeon.co/essays/having-children-is-not-life-affirming-its-immoral (2017)

14: Ibid

15: Marie-Louis Von Franz, The Problem of the Peur Aeturnus, pg. 84 (Inner City Books, 2000)

16. Ibid

17: Carl Jung, Collected Works Volume 14, Mysterium Coniunctionis, par. 206

18: Marie-Louis Von Franz, The Problem of the Peur Aeturnus, pg. 199 (Inner City Books, 2000)

Conversations on Reddit.com (Sam Harris and Philosophy Threads)