Freud and the discovery of the Super Ego:
Guilt is a unique emotion. Unlike most emotions, such as sadness, happiness, anger, fear etc., guilt is an emotion caused by someone else. Guilt does not arise from within. It comes from outside ourselves, or at least that’s how we perceive it. Guilt is a social emotion. If we lived on our own, we would most likely never feel it.
I recently read a fascinating book about guilt. The book is called “From Freud to Ayn Rand – Chapters in the History of Guilt in the Capitalist Era” by Oded Goldberg. The first chapter is devoted, obviously, to Freud. In reading this book I learned about some of Freud’s insights on guilt.
As you probably know, Freud described the human psyche as composed of three parts: the Id, the Ego and the Super Ego. Freud described the Id as that part in us that expresses our most childish and beastly impulses, the part that manifests mostly sexual and aggressive urges. Today, however, the Id is commonly described as the source of a multitude of impulses and needs. It is the Id that compels the toddler to nag his mother in order to get her attention, it is the Id that tempts us to eat ice cream, pizza and chocolate, it is the Id that makes a child hit his sister, or a man beat his wife, and it is the Id that drives us to pressure our wife into having intercourse with us. The Id has no patience. It wants it all, here and now. It does not see others, their needs and wants. It sees only itself. The Id is also the part of us that pushes us to carry out sinister acts that we are not even conscious of. The Id is not rational. The Id is the impulse, or evil inclination, according to Judaism.
In opposition to the Id Freud positioned another part of our psyche – the Super Ego. The Super Ego, through the Ego, stops the reckless stampede of the Id. It tames the Id and tells it to restrain itself, control itself, withstand frustration, acknowledge and be considerate of others. The Super Ego regulates social activity. It is society’s representative that dwells within us. Without the Super Ego, society could not function. The Super Ego can also be referred to as conscience or morality.
Until the days of Freud, conscience, morality and guilt were considered to be good measures. A person capable of restraining his impulses was seen as mature and responsible. But should we always view our conscience, morality or Super Ego as good measures? Is the Super Ego always rational?
Freud was on to something interesting. He asked himself where and how was the critical blaming voice of the Super Ego created. Freud understood that the Super Ego was in fact the internalized voice of our parents, mainly our father, and society. The child internalizes these voices, as well as those of educators and his environment, making them his own. But why does he do that? Why would a child internalize voices that are so unpleasant to him? According to Freud, he does that so that these voices continue to accompany him, to avoid separating from his parents. Because, what other options are there? Mom and dad won’t always be there with me. They go off to work. They don’t accompany me wherever I go. And I am left alone. In order to feel their love for me, I internalize their voices, and they, those internalized objects, escort me wherever I go. I get to keep my parents with me, even when they are not there.
The question is: are mom and dad’s voices always right? Are mom and dad moral conscientious people who always teach us to do the right thing? A child has no way of knowing this. He doesn’t have the tools to ascertain. He internalizes his parents’ critical voice, not because he cognitively understands that this voice is beneficial to him, but because he wants to carry on feeling close to mom and dad, whether they are good to him or not. The child needs his parents. But we all know parents who berate their children for no apparent reason. And we all know parents who expect and demand horrible things of their children.
“In our analysis”, writes Freud, “we find that there are those in whom self-criticism and conscience, i.e. highly valued emotional achievements, are unconscious and their most significant outcomes are revealed in the unconscious mind”. He continues, “We should therefore say, that not only the most debased but also the most elevated part of the self can be unconscious”. (“The Ego and the Id”, Freud, 1923)
Freud dared to say something quite revolutionary for his time: that part within us, which criticizes us, blames us, demands that we restrain ourselves, is not necessarily rational. Is not even necessarily conscious. That part in us disguises itself as mature and conscious, but sometimes its just an unconscious emotional mechanism that controls us, and not necessarily to our benefit. Sometime it does so out of great darkness.
In fact, so we are told, two unconscious mechanisms exist within us. Both the Id and the Super Ego are unconscious. Or at least not always conscious.
Another way to describe it, rather than saying that both mechanisms are unconscious, is to say that these mechanisms are childish. They are both remnants of our childhood. It is easy to comprehend why the Id is childish. But in what way is the Super Ego childish? It is so because its internalization stems from our need to feel loved. Children internalize the berating critical voice of their parents and society not because they pondered the content and rationally decided to adopt the values these voices expressed. Children are incapable of this sort of reasoning. They adopt the reproachful voices of their parents because they are horrified by the thought that their parents will abandon them if they do something their parents disapprove of.
Thus, our motivation to internalize these “moral” and “conscientious” voices is just to be awarded love, acceptance and a sense of belonging. And the need to be loved and to belong is a childish need.
Think about it. Two childish mechanisms “steal” us, entice us to act as they please. On the one side is the Id, prodding and tempting us to express and satisfy our most childish impulses and needs. While on the other side stands the Super Ego, pushing us, by means of threats of guilt and loss of love, to fulfill the moral decrees of our parents and the society in which we live, whether they are valid and worthy or not.
Only a person capable of reexamining his Super Ego, observing it, updating it from time to time in accordance with his own values, will possess a mature Super Ego or conscience. As long as this mechanism is unexamined, it remains childish.
This is quite a shocking revelation. Could it be that some and perhaps even all of our self-improvement work, some or perhaps all of our “correction” work, past and present, stems not from mature and rational thought but simply from the childish need to feel love and belonging?
Two types of guilt:
When describing a righteous person, one who has been elevated to a higher spiritual level, most moral teachings and religions speak of a man uncontrolled by the Id, or his impulses. “The True Hero is One Who Vanquishes His Desires”. For some religions the ideal is to completely suppress desire. Abstinence, for example, is an attempt to completely suppress the Id, or desire. In Judaism suppression of urges is not the ideal in any way. However, controlling, regulating and expressing it only in the right context, are definitely a central aspiration.
In contrast with moral teachings and religions, during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, schools of thought began to develop that actually considered breaking free of society’s moral decrees as a worthy ideal. The philosopher Nitsche was one of the most prominent of those voices. The existential philosophers of the early twentieth century encouraged people to be authentic, i.e., to adhere to their inner voice, as opposed to the demands of social decrees. In the spirit of Freud’s words, Nitsche and the existential psychologists in fact propose that a spiritually developed person is one set free from his Super Ego.
In fact, the twentieth century is characterized by psychological and new-age approaches that view the Super Ego as the source of all our inner-conflicts. They invite people to connect to their “inner child”, feelings, sexuality, desire and creativity, and to express all of these freely. Neurosis, anxiety and depression are not currently viewed by most modern approaches, as the outcome of a difficulty in controlling the Id, or impulses, but rather as the result of over-dominating the Id. The Super Ego and the guilt it brings forth with it are considered oppressive. A free man is free of guilt. Meaning free of “taking into account what the neighbors think”.
So what do we really need to be liberated from? Should we live free of the Id’s reign on our lives, or free of the reign on the Super Ego? What is it that disrupts our capacity to live a good and fulfilling life? Is it our childish, beastly primitive needs and desires over which we have no control, or maybe the opposite? Is it the excessive demands of our parents and society in which we live that prevent us from expressing our authenticity?
A twentieth century westerner is accused of two opposing “sins”. Sometimes he is guilty of letting his base impulses take control over him, while at other times he is guilty of being too submissive to society’s moral decrees.
Guilt in couple relationships:
If we look at couples, in every conflict both partners accuse each other of one, or both, types of blame.
You’re spoiled, you don’t help around the house, you’re childish, you victimize yourself, you lack self-control, you pressure me, you’re inconsiderate, you’re inattentive, you’re not in tune with my rhythm, you constantly need attention, you’re lazy, you’re a spendthrift…
These are all accusations in which one partner claims that the other is controlled by their Id, is lacking in self-control and inconsiderate.
Nonetheless, there are also accusations of the opposite nature: you only care about your family, you only care about the children, you’re always concerned about what the neighbors think, you’re constantly pleasing your boss, you’re un-authentic, you’re not in tune with your body, you’re disconnected from your emotions…
These accusations all claim that the other partner gives too much credence to the Super Ego – parents, family, society and culture. We accuse our partners of being too considerate of others.
Of course, no one will ever accuse their partner of being too considerate of them. We claim that our partner places too much emphasis on the demands of others, only when those others do not include ourselves. When our partner is considerate of us and fulfills our needs, we have no complaints.
Try to think of all the complaints your partner has against you. You are welcome to make a list. Then consider each one. Does your partner accuse you mostly of being controlled by your Id or by your Super Ego? Does he or she claim that you are too childish, unrestrained or primitive, or do they claim that you are inattentive to yourselves and too busy pleasing others?
What about your complaints against your partner? Do you claim that they are overly affected by their Id or desires, or do you think they are too controlled by the norms and conventions of their parents or society?
There is no doubt that our claims against our parents are legitimate. Whether we consider them slaves to their impulses or to society, they must change, and the sooner the better.
But what about our partners’ complaints of us? Is there any truth to their claims? Are we truly controlled by our desires, or rather by our strong need to be liked by authority figures in our life?
Guilt and Differentiation:
Differentiation is a term developed by a pioneer of Family therapy, Murray Bowen, which was later expanded by my teacher and mentor David Schnarch to the field of Couples and Sexual therapy. Differentiation depicts an individual’s capacity to stand his ground, be loyal to himself, his values and wants, in the face of society’s pressure on him to adapt.
Differentiation is emotional maturity.
A differentiated person can have deep, meaningful, intimate and passionate relationships, while staying loyal to himself and maintaining his own center.
What is the process that a differentiated mature person goes through in the face of guilt?
What does a differentiated person do when his partner accuses him of becoming a slave to his impulses or to society?
First it is imperative to understand that when we speak of a differentiated person, we are not speaking of a righteous or enlightened person. We are referring to a regular person, living his life, constantly in the process of increasing his level of maturity and freedom.
The question is, then, is a differentiated person controlled by his Id or by society?
A differentiated person is working through a process that will end, most likely, at the time of his death. He knows that his work will never be done. He knows that because he is honest with himself. He does not tell himself stories, he is not busy with creating or maintaining an image, he isn’t trying to sell himself as one thing or another to anyone. On the contrary. A differentiated person wants to observe himself, as he truly is.
David Schnarch, who taught me Differentiation based Couples Therapy said: “Only the best in us talks about the worst in us, because the worst in us lies about itself and its own existence.”
And indeed, undifferentiated people lie to themselves and tell themselves that they are not triggered or controlled by anything.
Differentiated people are happy to truthfully observe whatever it is that triggers them. They are happy to notice that they are still controlled by some urge or another. When they become aware that their Id or impulses control them, they are willing to bravely face that truth. When they see that they are triggered by the need to belong to society, thus abandoning their truth, they willingly take responsibility. They know that only by honestly confronting themselves, they can truly become whole people, triggered less and less by their Id and Super Ego.
So what does a differentiated person do when accused of something by their partner?
This is where it becomes a bit tricky. If one rejects accusations too fast, it is most likely the Id rejecting them. The last thing the Id is interested in doing is to stop and self-examine. Remember, the Id is busy only with fulfilling its desires, right here and right now.
On the other hand, if one agrees too quickly with accusations directed at him, there is a good chance that it is the Super Ego that is pulling the strings. This means that this person is controlled by a fierce need to be loved and belong, which will make him willingly accept, agree to and believe what others say about him, and therefore, stop listening to his inner voice.
A differentiated person does not reject accusations, nor does he concede to them without examination. A differentiated person will listen attentively to claims made against him. He knows that in doing so he can become a more complete person.
If he agrees to observe the worst parts of himself, i.e. the parts that control him, whether they be desire or morality, he will gain the opportunity to see more clearly those parts of him that still hold unconscious power over him. And by seeing them, he can later free himself of their power. A differentiated person knows that by refusing to see, he cannot be liberated.
A differentiated person doesn’t automatically concede with everything he is told. He pauses. He creates space. He quiets down. He listens to the accusations directed at him. He is not deterred by them. He is not afraid of guilt. He welcomes it with open arms. He breaths and observes. Any other form of action is reaction. Any other form of action stems from the Id or Super Ego. It is only in pausing, listening, taking a deep breath, observation and honest self-confrontation, that one can attain true freedom and liberation.
Good luck with your own liberation.
Amittai Megged
