The concept of taboo has already lost its intimidating religious meaning. Yet we do not believe that the sky will open up, and the deity on a fiery chariot will punish us for a sandwich during fasting. But we manage to put barriers in our heads, even forgetting where they came from. Do we need restrictions or is it a relic of the past of society? Why senseless bans only increase the desire to break them? How to get rid of the complexes in the sexual sphere? It is stupid when we put our own barriers. But that's exactly what adults are doing.
What is a taboo
Taboo is the absolute impossibility of performing a certain action. It is like a curse forever. It is unshakable and does not allow the possibility of breaking the line that is forbidden to break. Its meaning is somewhat ambivalent: on the one hand - it is something sacred, inaccessible to the common man, on the other - creepy, scary and cruel. Initially, the concept was a set of religious prohibitions, today it is transferred to the plane of internal moral restrictions. The other, mundane meaning of this concept is sacred.
The word "taboo" is of Polynesian origin, where it means the prohibition of sacred meaning. Severe restrictionsthat clergymen broadcast, often not justifiedbut they are something natural for all who are in their power. Before the word fell into our language, the concept of hard restrictions existed in all religions of the world.
Actually, religion is the code of prohibitions for all people regardless of their origin, social status or financial status. But for the violation of some it was possible to obtain verbal moralizing, and for the trampling of others immediately followed the cruel punishment of higher powers. Why such difference? Because taboos and moral morality are different things. Moral moralizing can be circumvented, cheated, buy indulgences. Taboo - no.
Taboo in religion
Taboos were introduced by religious ministers for several reasons. The first is drawing the line between people and sacred objectswhich are able to separate the sacred from the ordinary and everyday from the sacred. The second is the opportunity to maintain order in the community. For example, under the strictest ban were sexual relations between close relatives. Without knowledge of genetics, it was difficult to explain the prohibition, therefore the taboo was described briefly: "It is impossible. And the point. Otherwise, the punishment is heavenly." Moreover, the clergy often performed the punishment long before the higher forces, so that others would be discouraged.
Today, religious prohibitions have been preserved, above all, in relation to food. Actually, the biblical narration begins with the prohibition to eat the fruit from the tree of good and evil. From his violation and the fall of mankind happened, for which we are paying the price so far. Food religious restrictions are strict notions of fasting in Christianity, kosher food in the Jewish religion, halal in Islam. Other restrictions relate to behavior in general or on certain days, clothing, images of living beings, and others.
First scientific studies
The first researcher who classified the topic of tabooing was the Scottish ethnographer, anthropologist and religious scholar James John Fraser (01/01/1885-07.05.1941). He was the first to describe the taboo from the point of view of two opposing concepts - magic rituals and common sense. In his book, numerous prohibitions of various nations he divided into spheres of life:
- On forbidden actions - communication with representatives of other tribes, eating and eating, face exposure, going beyond the boundaries of a certain territory.
- On people or classes - for rulers and representatives of royal dynasties, for mourning, pregnant women, warriors, murderers, hunters and fishermen.
- On objects or parts of the human body - sharp objects, hair (rituals during shearing) or blood, the head as the receptacle of the human soul, knots and rings.
- In the names of the dead, rulers, deities.
The conclusion from this study was interesting: people always needed a sample to which they aspired. People saw a perfect model of life and dreamed of living the same way. But in order to reach transcendental heights they had to obey that very ideal.
Surprisingly, many of the prohibitions described in the book, we remember today. And we follow them without even thinking about the origin. For example, many do not throw away cut nails and hair, do not give sharp objects, do not tie knots.
Freud, taboo and ambivalence
Sigmund Freud (06.05.1856-23.09.1939) in his book "Totem and Taboo" considers taboo a product of ambivalence. Ambivalence is the duality of feelings towards anything. Having a hard ban, man on the one hand, he feels a holy thrill;.
Freud attaches the concept of taboo to the topic of psychoanalysis, the study of the unconscious part of the psychic life of personal and collective psyche. In his works, he describes people that they themselves created tough taboos and follow them no worse than the Polynesian savages. Freud even introduced the concept of "disease taboo" - an unreasonable painful obsession, which leads to endless disputes with himself, nervousness and obsessive rituals.
Moreover, unjustified prohibitions are to a certain extent infectious, they can be transmitted from person to person and seize large groups of people. The most frequent manifestation of this disease is a taboo on touch, and as a result - an obsessive ritual of endless ablutions.
In modern psychoanalysis, the concept of taboo is more explored in the sexual sphere. But there are other manifestations of internal prohibitions. For example, many of us unknowingly forbid themselves certain actions, thoughts, emotions, actions and do not even realize that they are dictated by internal taboos.
Moral and cultural taboos in our time
Modern society does not produce such categorical taboos. Scientists say that the number of moral prohibitions depends on the level of civilization. One thing is the impossibility of looking at the supreme ruler, another is a taboo on murder. Although much also depends on the person himself. If for one statement "Do not steal" finds a response in the soul, then for another it is rather a challenge. Yet it is human nature to do what is good for him and harm others. And stopping him from taking action is not at all moral, but the fear of public condemnation and the criminal code.
Legal restrictions prescribes the state, which is able to punish no worse than the high priest. Previously, all taboos were written in religious books, but today many do not follow strict religious moral teachings. Internal bans dictated by ethics and parental education, and external - by legal law. When a person unknowingly or deliberately violates the order, causes harm to the environment, the environment says "We do not like it, it hurts our interests" and creates certain laws.
In many countries there are cultural or behavioral taboos. For their violation no one will be sent to prison, but for those around him the offender becomes an outcast. That is, he himself falls under the influence of the taboo. For example, in Japan you cannot enter the house with street shoes, feel sorry for a crying person, or contact a higher boss without his permission. In Buddhist countries it is forbidden to touch the child’s head, and in Sweden it is not allowed to give carnations, which are considered mourning flowers. And these are just some of the many restrictions. But to avoid unpleasant situations, they should adhere to.
Do we need a taboo of segles?
Do you need strict bans today? Yes, rather. Of course, the old moral restrictions applied to a society that no longer exists today. Looking for others. Those that are aimed at saving lives, for example. When raising a small child, parents strictly prohibit him from approaching sockets or boiling pots. Children do not need to know the laws of motion of electrons in order to understand: you cannot stick your fingers into a socket. For adults, these are the rules of the road, the code of laws.
Sociologists say: the more people have internal cultural prohibitions, the better it fits into the social environment. Although sometimes unreasonable bans provoke numerous violations (ambivalence of feelings). So, during prohibition, the number of people drinking dramatically increases.
It would be much easier to coexist if everyone adhered to internal restrictions. Practicing psychologists note in their work that adults should also learn to respect other people's internal bans. And simply - do not climb into someone else's life with voluntary advice or tactless questions. Even if it seems to you that the limitations of the other person are ridiculous and meaningless, not worth teaching them lifegiving advice like:
- That should not be upset because of this ...
- Do not worry, it is better to be a brave man ...
- You need to force yourself ...
- Why such silly thoughts come to your mind ...
- It is foolish to worry about such a minor reason ...
And phase "I'm in your place ..." in general, should be anathematized, deleted from the memory of humanity. The only thing you can do is share your own experiences. And then, in the form of a dialogue.
Taboo in our head - how to recognize them
The state is able to taboo not all the processes in our life. But that which is not done at the level of society is voluntarily carried out at the level of the individual. We ourselves set up internal barriers that can severely burden our existence. We do this unconsciously, but with our "psychological hands." At the same time, we are not aware that it is they who are an obstacle to achieving success. We ban ourselves:
- Relationship with a big difference in age.
- Happiness in remarriage.
- Unplanned actions.
- Career growth (especially women).
- Change unloved work or care in the "free swimming".
- Experiments and emancipation in sex.
- Straight talk with children, parents.
And this is just the beginning. The more internal restrictions that we cannot explain ourselves, the less space is left for happiness. Bans in one area of life affect the rest, and the desire to violate them leads to disagreement with himself. A striking example is our excess weight. We often eat not because we love this dish. We seize internal bans on beauty, sexuality, relationships, material well-being. And the more we prohibit ourselves, the more we want to eat. And if at this time go on a diet, and prohibit yourself more and favorite foods, write gone. A set of a dozen extra pounds provided.
Our inner limitations can hurt loved ones. For example, some have a taboo on apologies. A person simply cannot pronounce simple words that can reduce the pain of another. There are those that we transfer to our children, husband or wife, also complicating their lives. Not only did we suffer, let them suffer now. But the answer to the question "Why?" we just don't have one. At best, we remember that someone told us this. So if you tabulate something in your personal life, it is non-interference in the space of close people.
Our unconscious taboos are more like microchips implanted in the head in childhood or adolescence. But people often call them cockroaches. Psychotherapists help mental "cockroaches" in the head. They unleash problems, like a ball of thread, get to the bottom of the root cause of a meaningless barrier. Psychologists are not only able to listen. They provide customers with tools that help them live and manage their inhibitions on their own. But psychotherapists are banned. After all, it is believed that psychopaths, weaklings or complete losers go to psychotherapy sessions. So before you go to a psychotherapy session, you will have to break at least one inner taboo to cope with the rest.
Findings:
- Taboo is a religious concept that today has shifted to the plane of ethical and psychological morality.
- Sexologists have formulated the basic rule of prohibitions in sex: if your behavior does not harm others, there is no reason to condemn it.
- Ambivalence is a contradictory desire to follow the prohibition and at the same time break it.
- The more unjustified prohibitions, the greater the desire to break them.
Our limitations protect us, but take away happiness.
