Now I use Jung's quote because he makes a very valid point, once you've experienced something you can undo that experience (unless you want to counter that with a debate of repression, or denial.. In which case I side with you anyways, but for the time being let's go with the flow I have), like that "light bulb". I have had a "light bulb" experience, and I can't go back. Plus, he has the same attitude towards this knowledge I have just obtained. It would be easier to not know, to not have had my "light bulb" experience, because now I have a set of opinions that COMPLETELY deviates from socially excepted ways of thinking through things. Alas, I had the "light bulb", so I will accept it, after all acceptance is the first step right?
Now... Let's dive into my mind. If you are at all familiarized with Freud I'm sure you have at least heard the words ID, EGO, and SUPEREGO.
Freudian Views- To make things a bit easier think of them as the three little controllers of your brain.
Id (the it)- The CORE of you as a person. Has only the power to wish for things, but wishes for only things that bring it pleasure, usually selfish, and or terrible things.
Ego (I)- The problem solver of the three. He has the power to plan, but suffers great anxiety, because he has to mediate between the Id and SuperEgo.
SuperEgo (the Over I, watches over the I)- a harsh judge of everything you do. Only men have the SuperEgo do to castration anxiety, which is a LOAD of poop. But whatever, everyone has their flaws, so did Freud, big time.
My views- Note that I don't view my three as little controllers.
Id- The primal instincts you are born with, after all humans are only mammals. You could say that you desires (SELF-INTEREST for later use) are located here. Very similar, but not the same as Freud's view I see this as the BASE of a person, but not the CORE. It is not the pleasure that excites it, but the satisfaction of a desire, or something in your self-interest.
The following to I find grouped together. They share the reasoning why you don't always act on the Id's desires, but are merely tools we use, and can choose to not use.
Ego- Your common sense and rationality. The reasoning behind why we don't always act on our desires.
SuperEgo- the moral code(s) you hold, based on personal beliefs, philosophies, religions, and so on.
Now Freud would have a fit if he saw my view. But it just makes sense! Please tell me you don't have three out of the three. You can't! You ARE a mammal! You DO have the power to use rational. And you have SOME KIND of moral code.
Now that you have taken a look at my views of the id, ego, and superego, I can make it to my next point... Freud as a hedonist. Hedonism is a philosophy in which pleasure is the ultimate importance to a person. And what would Freud say about this? "Why of course! That's what I've been saying all along!"- You'd probably think so, but I think Freud would have found something argue about, say- That is of ultimate importance to the ID and that we STILL didn't get it. Now Freud may argue that, but in my eyes, Freud turned hedonism into a science, after all, that is what psychology is isn't it? A SCIENCE. See where the line between philosophy and psychology is now? Yeah, neither do I... (but that's a whole other story).
So Freud's a hedonist, eh? So where do I fall? Well you could say me and Ayn Rand would get along better since I find the ego, in the sense of rationality so darn important. This is because she was a rational egoist, which is the belief that it is only RATIONAL to do what is in you self-interest, which really is what you desire (go ahead and take a look at my views of the id right about now). Or maybe not. I'd call myself a Psychological Egoist which is the belief that people are always motivated by self-interest. You as a human have desires, but sometimes act against them... Why? I say because it's you SuperEgo telling you it's a dark primal instinct, and that it would go against your morals. You have used that tool, and satisfied a moral code of yours. Ah ha! A satisfaction! So even though you are doing good, your SuperEgo is still just a tool you can use to satisfy a desire of moral. Does this mean that the SuperEgo could have a negative connotation? Why yes! In certain, and in my eyes, most or all, cases the SuperEgo is just as guilty as the Id. So you altruists keep it to yourself, I know your SuperEgo's enjoying this just as much as the Id enjoys when you eat WAY too much chocolate cake (I know it's a lame example, but it's publicly exceptable).
Now I know you've been reading for a while, but bare with me a couple lines longer...
Creation! What a wonderful thing! Freud created this theory of the Id, Ego, and SuperEgo (Also known as the Drive Structure Model for you curious cats), how, or why I'll never know. How I have created mine? Just as mystified with myself as I am Freud. So when people tell me "You can't just pull things out of thin air! You can't make something up!" (I've had just a FEW people say that to me now) I say why not? The most brilliant people in the history of man kind have MADE SOMETHING UP! They've all created theories, of their own. And that is what has made them famous, historical and brilliant. My best argument to that statement is this- There once was a human who thought up God. Just "made him up" ? Did the theory of God exist before man thought it? No. Yes? Which came first the chicken or the egg? You believe chicken, I believe egg, because I can prove chicken exists. Not saying I don't believe in a God, or higher power, but when looking at the facts, there ARE humans... Just a thought... Ha ha, case in point.
Psychiatry, neurobiology, these things are clearly science. I share your confusion regarding what makes psychology a science. Sure you can test hypotheses, but are the results repeatable? So much depends on the assumptions you start with, a lot in common with philosophy there!
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you about the process of creation. The advantage Freud has is a bit more time being tested by many who would disagree or agree with him. He isn't "famous" just because he came up with something, it has more to do with the fact that people have come to see the wisdom of his ways through their own experiences and investigations, and that this continues to happen over a long period of time.
Brilliance is often regarded as madness at first.
I agree. It's usually the mad ones who come up with the most brilliant and also practical ideas, but don't let others get in the way with your light bulb moments. In the words of Albert Einstein, "Great spirits have always faced violent opposition from mediocre minds." Create away! This is how humans ARE God, whether or not a supreme being by the same name created us or we created the idea of him/it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the Freudian stuff, I believe that there's a lot more to the mind/self/ego/'I' than just those three categories he invented. It was a worthy theory as far as the field of psychology goes, but his ideas are way outdated. There are many more fascinating concepts and theories that have been developed within psychology than Freud's, in my opinion; e.g. humanistic psych (Maslow & Rogers), positive psych (Seligman), and my favorite, Buddhist psychology and philosophy which basically denies that an individual self even exists because all phenomena are interdependent and cannot exist alone. I've been having the same questions about science, psychology and philosophy for a few years now and am still debating whether or not science can ever be ultimately objective. Science (and empirical psychology that records 'measurable' behavior, attitudes and mental 'illness') is trying to objectify phenomena and experiences that are purely subjective. How can a scientist (no matter which variety) conclude anything to be empirically sound and objective when our view of reality is so limited and relative to our own perspective? I just don't know! Maybe everything is a science (absolutes equaling the relative particulars), or nothing is at all (everything is relative, nothing is absolute).
All in all, I enjoy your blogs Katie, keep writing out those ideas no matter what 'they' say!
Freud didn't create anything that hadn't already been created. He looked at the way things were and made a guess as to why. I do not agree with him entirely, but I would say the id/ego/super-ego dynamic is pretty accurate. He verbalized this truth, but it still would have existed had he not said so. These aspects of our nature are not dependent on being identified. The same is true of God.
ReplyDeleteI didn't know about God when I was kid. I guess you could say that in a strictly personal context he didn't exist until i thought of him. He wasn't real to me until I supposed he could be. However this does not mean I brought him into existence. The problem with this way of thinking is that I am assuming that I,a human am on the same level as the God of the universe. I make MYSELF the creator and God the creation. But what can I create? Can i make earth? Can I make the sun set? Even my own body which i call my own i did not create. I have no control over anything around me.
All the theories in all the world are observations on how things ARE, especially God. For what can be known about God is plain to them [people], because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he had made, so they are without excuse; Romans 1:18-20
Think about you. Your body, your mind your personality. You are one of the most complex creations in all existence. I'm studying anatomy and it absolutely mind boggling how thousands of cells work together in tissues and organs and systems all completely in harmomy just to allow you to survive. But on top of that you think, you imagine, you dream, you love. How could this not have been planned and orchestrated? Evolution is guess as to how but it leaves a big fat empty WHY? that screams at each individual's soul.
Psychology, philosophy, genetics, biology and so on are the slow mortal discovery of God's incomprehensibly vast blueprint of life. You can spend every breath you have trying to discover how things are, but knowledge without purpose is the best depressant I know. And through all my searching and seeking I've only found one remedy that heals that ache.