Superego II More on the Inflated Sense of Being Right By Todd F. Eklof November 2, 2008

Transcription

1 More on the Inflated Sense of Being Right By Todd F. Eklof November 2, 2008 Last week I spoke of that component of human personality Freud called the superego, referring to something unconscious in us that, in his words, retains the character of the father, 1 and [gives] permanent expression to the influence of the parents 2 By the buzz my message seemed to create after our service, I decided it might be worth spending just a little more time on the subject to help all of us better understand it, and to better clarify why I think it s worth bringing up. But first, let me be the first to admit that, with the strong exception of the word ego, which has found almost an entirely new context and meaning than it originally had, Freud s three prong breakdown of the personality into id, ego, and superego, remains primarily the language of professional Freudian psychoanalysis. In other words, the words id and superego are not words most of us ordinarily use. In fact, I d venture to say that we tend to use the word ego as a catchall reference to a variety of different states of consciousness. But we are not alone, those accomplished psychologists who followed in Freud s footsteps, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, Erich Fromm, B.F. Skinner, Rollo May, Viktor Frankl, Abraham Maslow, and many others, hardly, if ever, used the terms id or superego, though you can find the word ego dispersed throughout their writings. So let s avoid getting too caught up in the specific words we use, and attempt, rather to clarify the principles at work behind them. Freud used the word id, for instance, to describe that part of the personality that is motivated purely by the instinctual pleasure principle and wants immediate gratification. In his mind it is the only component of the personality we all have at the moment we re born, which necessarily helps us get our infantile needs met. Obviously it becomes necessary to eventually outgrow such a self centered mindset is we want to have meaningful and fulfilling relationships with others. But this bit of pragmatism does not mean the id really exists somewhere in our brains. It is simply a word Freud used to describe the tendency toward basing our behavior purely on our own immediate wants and needs at the exclusion of everything and everyone else. If Abraham Maslow were to try to articulate this same tendency, he would likely refer to the physiological desires at the bottom of his hierarchy of needs. Developmental psychologist, Lawrence Kohlberg, called this same mindset, pre conventional morality, characterized by behavior that is self centered and motivated by the desire to avoid punishment. The 19 th century philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, likewise, referred to it as the aesthetic stage in which people are 1 Freud, Sigmund, The Ego and the Id, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY1923, 1960, p Ibid., p. 25.

2 motivated purely by the gratification of their immediate senses. So, whatever we choose to call it, all of these thinkers were getting at a principle that motivates us to behave in a manner that is more instinctual than conscious, more selfish than social, and more infantile than mature. But as we begin to mature, experiencing more and more of the world outside ourselves, more than those interior impressions craving our own nourishment and warmth, a new kind of consciousness if born that tells us at once that we are both part of a larger world, and, in that knowledge, that we are also separate from others. This awareness is not based on internal impressions, on our unconscious instincts, but on external impressions, on sensual experiences. Freud called this the ego, by which he meant that level of personality that interfaces with reality, or, at least, with our interpretation of the world outside our bodies by using our five senses. The ego is the part of us that struggles to makes sense of the world. Unlike the id, which is motivated by the pleasure principle, the ego is motivated by what Freud called the reality principle. But again, other thinkers have, quite independently, attempted to describe this same tendency in different terms. Maslow, for example, suggested that once we move beyond our physiological needs, we come to want love and belonging from our community. Kierkegaard called this the ethical stage in which we learn to base our behavior on cultural rules and expectations rather than our aesthetic desires. And, Kohlberg, likewise, described this as the conventional stage in which we also abide by the expectations of others in order to fit in and get along. Again, all of these thinkers seem to be getting at the same principle, that part of us learns to set aside the gratification of our immediate desires in favor of larger concerns. So, whatever we choose to call these perspectives, id, pre conventional, aesthetic, childish, on the one hand, or ego, conventional, ethical, and social on the other, we can agree with Freud that a certain tension comes into being between the interior and exterior worlds, the unconscious and the conscious, the individual and society. The part of us that wants immediate gratification will always be a little perturbed by the part of us that recognizes we can t always act simply in our own interests and desires. If the more childish part of us can t get over the disappointment of not having immediate gratification, it can cause all sorts of problems for us by unconsciously acting out in ways that are very foolish and destructive. I couldn t believe I could be so childish, John Bradshaw writes at the beginning of his book, Homecoming: Reclaiming and Championing Your Inner Child, I was 40 years old and I had raged and screamed until everyone my wife, my stepchildren, and my son was terrified. Then I got into my car and left them. There I was, sitting all alone in a motel in the middle of our vacation on Padre Island. I felt alone and ashamed. 3 This incident, which I m confident many of us can relate to, became the impetus for a transformation in Bradshaw s life that led him to deal with the 3 Bradshaw, John, Homecoming, Bantam Books, New York, NY, 1990, p. 6. 2

3 disappointments of his wounded inner child, and to since help many others to do the same. If we don t do this, if we don t deal honestly with the part of us that acts like a disappointed child if we can t admit to ourselves that we re acting out like children then we are much more likely to try to justify our selfish, narcissistic, and instinctual behavior, by making it sound reasonable and mature. The problem is, these excuses aren t really reasonable or mature, so we have to figure out a way to dismiss the part of us that is in touch with reality so we can feel good about our selfish delusional behavior. This is where the creation of, what Freud referred to as, the superego comes in. Remember that the superego is not an inflation of the ego, our interface with reality, but of the id, the part of us that is unconscious. In short, the superego is the wounded inner child dressed up as an adult. But because it is no longer in touch with reality, it doesn t realize it s just playing make believe, and actually thinks it is mature and is behaving like an adult. When this happens, as Carl Jung warned, if [one] allows [one s] libido to get stuck in a childish milieu, and does not free it for higher purposes, [one] falls under the spell of unconscious compulsion. 4 When operating from the place of superego, that is, of make believe superiority, in particular, this compulsion to act out on our childish fixations, leads us to do so by forcing ourselves onto others with overbearing, often unjust, rules, mores, and governments. Again, the superego, in Freudian terms, in linked with the unconscious, with the id, but stems most directly from that part of us that identifies with the authority of our parents, our fathers in particular, which is a good reason to suspect that authoritarian patriarchal societies are governed by a bunch of wounded angry children who think they re highly functional adults. and here we have that higher nature, writes Freud, in this ego ideal or super ego, the representative of our relation to our parents. When we were little children we knew these higher natures, we admired them and feared them; and later we took them into ourselves. 5 So now, at last, I hope we ve reached the point where I can better discuss why this tendency is of such concern to me. In one sentence, the superego often leads us to act in ways that are harmful to others by enabling us to justify ourselves as morally superior to those we oppress or ignore. In no way is this more clear to me than regarding fundamentalist religion. Fundamentalism is a decidedly authoritarian, patriarchal mindset, a strong indicator that it is rooted in immature thinking, and controls behavior primarily by passing strict rules and punishing those who violate them. Again, as Freud explained, As a substitute for a longing for the father, [the superego] contains the germ from which all religions have evolved. 6 But again, the superego cannot face reality, and must, therefore, suppress those 4 Jung, C. G., Symbols of Transformation, CW, vol. 5, Bollingen Series XX, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1990, p Freud, ibid., p Ibid., p

4 individuals and institutions that are more in touch with the world outside its own internal fabrications. We have seen this throughout the centuries as the Church has silenced and imprisoned scientists who did not uphold its worldview. Similarly, Christian theology sets God against the world, and its followers against their own bodies, that is, against the part of themselves that enables them to realistically interface with the outside world, the ego. As Freud said, The ego is first and foremost a bodily ego; it is not merely a surface entity, but is itself a projection of a surface. 7 In brief, the ego is created when we sense the external world. It is an entity that relies on sensual perceptions for its existence. So, if the superego, representing the id s desire to squelch the ego so it can act on all its selfish desires without fearing the consequences, can, as a superior being, condemn reality, that is, the outside world, including its interface, the body and its senses, as fallen, evil, and sinful, then the id can feel good about itself despite the fact that its unconscious motivations are exclusively self centered. In other words, a sense of moral superiority can indicate that we are operating from a place of unconsciousness and delay in our psychological development. What s worse, this superior mindset, rooted in childish whims, enables some individuals to abscond with the moral high ground while promoting all manner of injustice. George Bush s motivations for going to war in Iraq were clearly selfcentered, yet he was able to justify his actions, and gain support from lots of other superegos in our society, by cloaking his instinctual desires in the simplistic, blackand white language typical of preschool children. Evil doers, Terrorists, They hate our freedom, and presumed superiority over those who disagreed with him by calling them unpatriotic. Similarly, in recent years, we ve also seen many people, in the name of morality, institutionalize bigotry and discrimination against gays and lesbians, just as they have against minorities and women in the past. The superego allows them to say, essentially, God wants us to discriminate against people who are less than us, or, more accurately, against people who get in the way of our own latent desires. It is the superego that, for nearly a century, has allowed us to ignore the negative impact of our greenhouse emissions, by ridiculing others as nature lovers, tree huggers, and environmental quacks. This part of us that justifies its actions as morally superior, is responsible for all manner of inequality, oppression, violence, and destruction in the name of righteousness. Yet those who promote genuine love and justice are condemned as, traitors, nigger lovers, unpatriotic, liberals, godless, immoral, and you name it. What s more is that the superego justifies its hatred for others as its love for rules, often for rules it considers of divine origin, a further symptom of its own inflation. Like children stuck in a punitive mindset that relies upon an authoritarian figure to tell them the absolute difference between right and wrong, those under the 7 Ibid., p

5 influence of the superego care only that their rules are followed, no questions asked, no matter what the consequences. This enables them to maintain their illusion of moral superiority even though their selfish actions, motivated by the childish desire to own and be in control of everything, end up harming and impoverishing others. But it is all too easy to take the moral high ground ourselves, to presume, because we are against such injustices, and are less likely to be motivated by selfishness or deluded by the superego. Yet if we return to Freud, we find that even our own highest aspirations are suspect. Of the divine decree to love our neighbors he says, The command is impossible to fulfill; such an enormous inflation of love can only lower its value and not remedy the evil. 8 We may not be involved in those extremist ideologies that lead us to justify the oppression of others, but we may be no less delusional if our high ideals are not based on reality. Although we may not be fundamentalists, it is still possible for us to use our religion to escape reality. This is why, as I pointed out in my last message on this subject, I am disturbed by language and beliefs suggesting we ought to utterly destroy the ego, that is, our interface with reality. To me this is little different than accepting a theology that tells us the world is bad, that we are born bad, and that our bodies are obscene and shameful. Some escape reality by condemning it, but others by ignoring it, by adopting religious and spiritual attitudes that tell us matter doesn t really matter, so long as we can maintain the proper inner attitude. How, then, can we be certain our highest aspirations are genuine, and not merely inflated excuses to evade the real world in favor of our delusions? I don t think there is any way to be sure, nor do I think such certainty is necessary. We are, as a species, prone to unconscious behavior and will, as a matter of our nature, always act in unconscious ways. Yet, because our species, unlike any other, also has an inkling of self awareness, it is possible for us to question our motives, to struggle, even in the wake of our uncertainty, to, as Socrates suggested, know yourself, and, to your own self be true. That s the benefit of studying psychology from a spiritual perspective; so we can better express our own authenticity. What s motivating me? is a worthy question to ask, even if we don t know the answer. But for me, at least, there is a partial answer to this question. Reality ought to be our motivation. Why should I love my neighbor? Because, if I take an honest look at the world, there are a lot of people out there who are hurting and can use some help. Why should I fight for justice? Because oppression and violence and poverty abound around almost every corner. Why must I care for the environment? Because, if I stop ignoring certain inconvenient truths in favor of my preferred reality, I must admit that global climate change is real and if the world is going to survive we must face this challenge! The converse is also true. If, as a society, we 8 Freud, Sigmund, Civilization and its Discontents, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, NY, 1930, 1994 p. 68f. 5

6 had looked at the facts, if we would have used our common sense, our nation never would have gone to war in Iraq, which did not represent any real threat. Likewise, if we stop relying on texts that were first handed down by authority figures thousands of years ago, and actually use our senses to get to know some of our neighbors who happen to be gay, we ll find them to be no different than us, and most certainly deserving of the same rights and respect. I guess for me, in my wrestling with these Freudian terms, I come to the conclusion that we ought to use religion and spirituality to make us more aware of reality, not as an excuse to escape it. Yes, reality means I can t always put myself first. Yes, it means I will sometimes experience loss, pain, and injustice. And, yes, reality means dealing with the world as it is, rather than as I want it to be. But reality also means I get to experience an entire world beyond myself. I get to make friends, and have lovers. I can give and receive. I can be awestruck by the beauty of nature, and humbled by the majesty of a mountain. I can take in a stray dog that needs a home. I can pet the neighbor s cat and listen to it purr in response to my touch. I can taste dark chocolate and never be satisfied. I can weep over the loss of a loved one, at the end of heartwarming movie, or at the sight of another s plight. I can share in the work that needs to be done. I can listen to another s thoughts, and share my own. I can watch my forehead grow and my beard turn white as my life moves closer to its final winter. I can watch my children grow. I can lift 200 pounds off my chest 32 times in a single morning. I can ride my motorcycle, or my bicycle, or go for a long walk with my spouse on Saturday morning. Yet, in all of this, I can know so little of the world, so little about the whole of reality. And so reality remains a most precious gem to me, and I worship every glimpse I catch of its soft gleam. I cannot pretend to understand all there is to know about psychology, or religion, or spirituality. But what I do know is that in my life I have been the most satisfied when I have allowed these disciplines to draw me closer to the world, not away from it. Reality may not be as safe or certain as my delusions, but it is infinitely more meaningful and fulfilling. 6