Reply
Wed 21 Feb, 2007 06:15 am
I am a social person because I am yours
"I am a social person because I am no longer mine: because I am yours."--Freud
One of life's more urgent problems is learning to set the boundaries of the ego. Such control represents true maturity of character and personality; Sounds simple enough.
Anxiety is the universal response of the organism to danger. For the child, anxiety becomes second nature when there is the slightest hint of separation from or abandonment by the mother.
Freud's whole psychoanalytic theory of neurosis is basically a study of how children control anxiety. Human reaction to the environment is delayed and controlled by the ego. Unlike all other animals the human can take some time to analyze and choose a response. It is obvious that the first concern for the developing ego is to learn how to control this ever present and overwhelming stimulus-response that can result from anxiety. The ego does this by ?'housing' this anxiety within the ego, thus, no longer does the human organism respond directly to anxiety but the ego controls the response by ?'taking over' this anxiety.
A major revision of Freudian theory finds that while the child's anxiety is based on helplessness; it is not based upon genetic instincts but is based upon the child's life situation and in his social world.
The restriction of experience is the heaviest price an animal can pay and it is the restriction of experience that the human animal pays to control anxiety. Freud tells us that the ego staves off anxiety "only by putting restrictions on its own organization".
The egos theoretical limits are limited from the very beginning during interaction with its parents. The mechanisms of defense thus become excellent techniques of self-deception. This is the fateful paradox we call neurosis: The child is given into humanization by giving over the aegis over himself. Freud says for the child "You no longer will have to punish me father; I will punish myself
You can approve of me as you see how well I do as you would wish me to
I am a social person because I am no longer mine; because I am yours."
Becker says "the conclusion of Freud's work is that the humanization process itself is the neurosis".
Did you know that we are all neurotic to one degree or another?
Ideas and quotes from "The Birth and Death of Meaning"?-Becker
Neurosis as defined in Wikipedia
The term was coined by the Scottish doctor William Cullen in 1769 to refer to "disorders of sense and motion" caused by a "general affection of the nervous system." For him, it described various nervous disorders and symptoms that could not be explained physiologically. It derives from two Greek words: neuron (nerve) and osis (diseased or abnormal condition). The term was however most influentially defined by Sigmund Freud over a century later.
Neurosis is no longer used as a formal term in modern psychology in English-speaking countries; the American DSM-IV has eliminated the category altogether. This largely reflects a decline in the fashionability of psychoanalysis, and the progressive expurgation of psychoanalytical terminology from the DSM. Those who retain a psychoanalytical perspective, which would include a majority of psychologists in countries such as France, continue to use the term 'neurosis'.
[edit] Psychoanalytical account of neurosis
As an illness, neurosis represents a variety of psychiatric conditions in which emotional distress or unconscious conflict is expressed through various physical, physiological, and mental disturbances, which may include physical symptoms (e.g., hysteria). The definitive symptom is anxieties. Neurotic tendencies are common and may manifest themselves as depression, acute or chronic anxiety, obsessive-compulsive tendencies, phobias, and even personality disorders, such as borderline personality disorder or obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. It has perhaps been most simply defined as a "poor ability to adapt to one's environment, an inability to change one's life patterns, and the inability to develop a richer, more complex, more satisfying personality." [1] Neurosis should not be mistaken for psychosis, which refers to more severe disorders.
The term connotes an actual disorder or disease, but under its general definition, neurosis is a normal human experience, part of the human condition. Most people are affected by neurosis in some form. A psychological problem develops when neuroses begin to interfere with, but not significantly impair, normal functioning, and thus cause the individual anxiety. Frequently, the coping mechanisms enlisted to help "ward off" the anxiety only exacerbate the situation, causing more distress. It has even been defined in terms of this coping strategy, as a "symbolic behavior in defense against excessive psychobiologic pain [which] is self-perpetuating because symbolic satisfactions cannot fulfill real needs." [2]
According to psychoanalytic theory, neuroses may be rooted in ego defense mechanisms, but the two concepts are not synonymous. Defense mechanisms are a normal way of developing and maintaining a consistent sense of self (i.e., an ego), while only those thought and behavior patterns that produce difficulties in living should be termed neuroses.
Quote:One of life's more urgent problems is learning to set the boundaries of the ego. Such control represents true maturity of character and personality
There's a problem here. There are no boundaries to the ego. It has no substance, it is merely a reflection of it's surroundings at any given time.
True maturity of character and personality is to realize that. Not to realize that is to remain a child for life, trying to climb up a beam of moonlight.
Cyracuz wrote:Quote:One of life's more urgent problems is learning to set the boundaries of the ego. Such control represents true maturity of character and personality
There's a problem here. There are no boundaries to the ego. It has no substance, it is merely a reflection of it's surroundings at any given time.
True maturity of character and personality is to realize that. Not to realize that is to remain a child for life, trying to climb up a beam of moonlight.
Certainly I can exercise some control of my ego.
You can control how you relate to the idea of god also, but that does not make it an idea that neccesarily has any substance to it.
What is ego but the feeling of self? We can control it to some degree, but not completely. Ego is the thing that swells when the light shines on our percieved self, and the thing that aches when it does not. So our sense of self, of what it is, is the real control of our ego. If we maintain the conviction that the self is something that completely belongs to the individual with the notion of it, that it is something indistinguishable from it's surroundings, then we are setting ourselves up to be puppets of our ego.
Ego says, HOLD IT, TIME OUT!
The ego is our command center; it is the "internal gyroscope" and creator of time for the human. It controls the individual; especially it controls individual's response to the external environment. It keeps the individual independent from the environment by giving the individual time to think before acting. It is the device that other animal do not have and thus they instinctively respond immediately to the world.
The id is our animal self. It is the human without the ego control center. The id is reactive life and the ego changes that reactive life into delayed thoughtful life. The ego is also the timer that provides us with a sense of yesterday, today, and tomorrow. By doing so it makes us into philosophical beings conscious of our self as being separate from the ?'other' and placed in a river of time with a terminal point?-death. This time creation allows us to become creatures responding to symbolic reality that we alone create.
As a result of the id there is a "me" to which everything has a focus of being. The most important job the ego has is to control anxiety that paradoxically the ego has created. With a sense of time there comes a sense of termination and with this sense of death comes anxiety that the ego embraces and gives the "me" time to consider how not to have to encounter anxiety.
Evidence indicates that there is an "intrinsic symbolic process" is some primates. Such animals may be able to create in memory other events that are not presently going on. "But intrinsic symbolization is not enough. In order to become a social act, the symbol must be joined to some extrinsic mode; there must exist an external graphic mode to convey what the individual has to express
but it also shows how separate are the worlds we live in, unless we join our inner apprehensions to those of others by means of socially agreed symbols."
"What they needed for a true ego was a symbolic rallying point, a personal and social symbol?-an "I", in order to thoroughly unjumble himself from his world the animal must have a precise designation of himself. The "I", in a word, has to take shape linguistically
the self (or ego) is largely a verbal edifice
The ego thus builds up a world in which it can act with equanimity, largely by naming names." The primate may have a brain large enough for "me" but it must go a step further that requires linguistic ability that permits an "I" that can develop controlled symbols with "which to put some distance between him and immediate internal and external experience."
I conclude from this that many primates have the brain that is large enough to be human but in the process of evolution the biological apparatus that makes speech possible was the catalyst that led to the modern human species. The ability to emit more sophisticated sounds was the stepping stone to the evolution of wo/man. This ability to control the vocal sounds promoted the development of the human brain.
Ideas and quotes from "Birth and Death of Meaning"?-Ernest Becker
Hmmm... You've posted this in another thread. I remember reading it...