The "Super-ego."

Dean Gotcher

"The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves: the superego 'unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past [the child's "lust" for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' and his dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, hatred of restraint, i.e., hatred of the father's/Father's authority]." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will, i.e., having to set aside pleasure, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to "self" in order (as in "old" world order) to do the father's/Father's will, i.e., in order to do right and not wrong according the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth], and desperately wicked [hating the father's/Father's authority which "gets in the way," i.e. which prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment'—which the world stimulates]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 You, dialoguing with your "self," i.e., 'justifying' your "self," i.e., 'justifying' your love of pleasure can not see your hatred toward the father/Father as being evil because your love of "self," i.e., your love of ("lust" for) pleasure—which the world stimulates—is "in the way," blinding you to the truth of the deceitfulness and wickedness of your heart.

"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16

The "super-ego" was Sigmund Freud's answer to the guilty conscience (feeling guiltyRomans 7:14-25—for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning against the father/Father and his/His established commands, rules, facts, and truth—Hebrews 12:5-11) so the child could do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., be his "self" without having a guilty conscience—Genesis 3:1-6. In essence, for Freud, the "super-ego" ("self" 'justification') is what 'drives' man to eventually reject the father's/Father's authority, i.e., from having to find his identity in the father/Father, by finding his identity in the nation (the "brother clan") instead—who still hold onto a form of the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system, requiring others to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to keep order and get work done (resulting in the individual still having to think and act counter to his carnal nature). Without "help" from "professionals"—in order (as in "new" world order) to find his identity in his "self" (in his carnal nature) and in society (with those of the same carnal nature)—the individual can not escape his condition, i.e., become his "self," i.e., become "self actualized." 

"Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature)

"[We] must develop persons who see non-influencability of private convictions in joint deliberations [in the facilitated, consensus meetings] as a vice rather than a virtue [as being "the problem," i.e., "negative" instead of contributing to the solution, i.e., being "positive," i.e., ]." (Kenneth D. Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

According to Freud, without his "help" the individual, as well as society would remain in a state of "neurosis," where the individual's natural desire to be his "self," i.e., to do what he wants, when he wants, i.e., to enjoy the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates (which he has in common with everyone else in society) and his having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self" in order (as in "old" world order) to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth (which "represses" his "self," resulting in him "alienating" his "self" from society, i.e., preventing, i.e., inhibiting or blocking his "self" from "building relationship" with others who have his same carnal nature/desires) are in constant conflict, resulting in his "private convictions," i.e., the guilty conscience preventing, i.e., inhibiting or blocking him from being "of and for self" and the world only. For Freud, instead of the heart being the problem, the individual's projecting of his pent up anger against the father's/Father's authority upon others (instead of upon the father/Father himself) becomes the problem

    "'Every renunciation ... becomes a ... conscience; every fresh abandonment of gratification increases its severity and intolerance ... every impulse of aggression which we omit to gratify is taken over by the super-ego and goes to heighten its aggressiveness (against the ego).'  'That which began in relation to the father ends in relation to the community.'" "[T]he superego ... works in the service of Eros."
    "... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother—culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father, and the establishment of the brother clan, which in turn deifies the assassinated father and introduces those taboos and restraints which, ..., generated social morality." 
(Sigmund Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud)

According to Freud, his pent up anger against the father/Father and his/His authority is projected against those who are not of his nation (his "brother clan"), as he moves to nationalism in order to distance his "self" from being directly under the father's/Father's authority. Rejecting the true problem, the heart of man, Freud, as did Karl Marx (along with all of philosophers) believed it was in the environment in which the person was raised where "the problem" resided. Create the right environment and the "mentally healthy" person would arrive. Therefore the agenda was to emancipate, i.e., 'liberate' the individual from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the "unhealthy environment" (the source of "neurosis") in order for him to become his "self" again, i.e., carnal, i.e., of the world only, as we was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, and truth came into his life, requiring him to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will.

"Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure [the father's/Father's authority (Hebrews 12:5-11)], . . . have all left man overly docile [humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will], but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic [believing one thing while "feeling" and/or acting contrary—called belief-action dichotomy, i.e., desiring to obey God, yet sinning, feeling guilty for sinning (Romans 7:14-25)]." "Neurotic symptoms, with their fixations on perversions and obscenities [the child's natural inclination to sin, i.e., "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates], demonstrate the refusal of the unconscious essence of our being [our flesh and eyes "lusting" after the things of the world which we have in common with all mankind] to acquiesce in the dualism of flesh and spirit, higher and lower [to submit to the father's/Father's authority]. The foundation on which the man of the future will be built is already there, in the repressed unconscious [in the child's carnal, i.e., sinful nature, i.e., in "human nature"]; the foundation has to be recovered [the child must be 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the child, privately dialoguing with his "self" (his love of, i.e., "lust" for pleasure and hate of restraint and the restrainer) must be "grouped" with other children, who are themselves privately dialoguing with their "self" (their love of, i.e., "lust" for pleasure and hate of restraint and the restrainer), and, through dialoguing with one ('discovering' their common identity) unit with one another upon what they have in common (their love of, i.e., "lust" for pleasure and hate of restraint and the restrainer)—making the child's love of, i.e., "lust" for the pleasures of the world and hate of the father's/Father's authority the basis of life, 'creating' common-ism through dialogue, i.e., through "self" 'justification' with one another, i.e., affirming one another's carnal nature as being "norm." Dialogue is the pathway to common-ism, making "feelings" the foundation of right and wrong, making all children, i.e., mankind seducible, deceivable, and manipulatable (as "human resources," like Pavlov's dog, Thorndike's chickens, Skinner's rats) by the facilitator of 'change' to be used for his own pleasure and gain]." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"Authoritarian submission [nationalism, tantamount to Fascism in the mind of 'liberal's'] was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

" . . .the conscience or superego is incompletely integrated with the self or ego,"  "the ego here being conceived of as embracing the various self—controlling and self—expressing functions of the individual . . . permit[ting] gratification without inviting too much punishment by the superego,"  "It is a function of the ego to make peace with conscience, to create a larger synthesis within which conscience, emotional impulses, and self operate in relative harmony."  "When this synthesis is not achieved, the superego has somewhat the role of a foreign body within the personality, and it exhibits those rigid, automatic, and unstable aspects discussed above."  (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)  (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

"Freud's concept of superego definition, … that the child internalizes the father figure to form the superegos as a way of resolving the pressures of exigencies [necessity] of the family ["self" preservation]." "The superego is conceived in psychoanalysis as functioning substantially in the same way as the conscience. Superego development is conceived as the incorporation of the moral standards of society.  Therefore the levels of the Taxonomy should describe successive levels of goal setting appropriate to superego development." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin Bloom et al. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain, p. 39)

Replace (negate) the guilty conscience, i.e., the father's/Father's authority with the "super-ego," i.e., the child's carnal nature and you have to have a police state in order (as in "new" world order) to keep order. It is in the child's dialoguing with his "self," 'justifying' his "self," i.e., 'justifying his "self interest," 'justifying' his carnal nature, i.e., his love of pleasure and hate of restraint, i.e., his "lusting" after (coveting of) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates—'justifying' his dissatisfaction with, resentment towards, hatred of the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience which it engenders (which gets in the way of pleasure)—that the psychologist, i.e., the "behavior scientist," i.e., the group psychotherapists, i.e., the facilitators of 'change', i.e., the Transformational Marxists (all being the same in method or formula) are most interested in 'discovering' and 'liberating.' By seducing, deceiving, and manipulating children into dialoguing their opinions ("feelings") in order to arrive at a consensus (affirmation), i.e., turning them into chickens, rats, and dogs in the group grade," "safe zone/space/place," "Don't be negative, be positive," soviet style, brainwashing, i.e., "Bloom's Taxonomy," affective domain classroom they are able to negate the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience which it engenders in their thoughts and actions (called "the negation of negation"), thus fulfilling Immanuel Kant's, Georg Hegel's, Karl Marx's, and Sigmund Freud's agenda of using the praxis of Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., "self" 'justification,' in order (as in "new" world order) to negate Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, in order to negate Romans 7:14-25, i.e., the guilty conscience (the real agenda), so they (along with "the people" of the world) could do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity. Homeschooling material and programs (with the "help" of the "church," i.e., the "youth group") are now joining in the process—"What about your children's social(ist) life?"

"The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated." "The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing)

"... once you can identify a community [where parent's are willing to 'compromise' the standards they set for their family, in order to initiate and sustain relationship with those outside of their family], you have discovered the primary unity of society above the individual and the family that can be mobilized ... to bring about positive social change." (ibid)

"If the guilt [the "guilty conscience" for disobeying the Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth] accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man [reflected in the Father's authority over his children] can ever be redeemed by freedom [with the children 'liberating' themselves from the Father's authority, 'reconciled' themselves back to their "self" and the world], then the 'original sin' [the children determining what is right and what is wrong according to their own carnal nature, I.e., their own personal "feelings" and "thoughts" of the 'moment'] must be committed again: We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence [as the children were before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into their lives, with the father/Father threatening to chasten them for disobedience (threatening to cast them out for questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his/His authority)]." (Herbart Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud

"The entry into Freud cannot avoid being a plunge into a strange world and a strange language―a world of sick men, ....It is a shattering experience for anyone seriously committed to the Western traditions of morality and rationality to take a steadfast, unflinching look at what Freud has to say. To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit; and this book cannot without sinning communicate that experience to the reader." "Our real choice is between holy and unholy madness: open your eyes and look around you―madness is in the saddle anyhow." "It is possible to be mad and to be unblest, but it is not possible to get the blessing without the madness; it is not possible to get the illuminations without the derangement," "I wagered my intellectual life on the idea of finding in Freud what was missing in Marx."  (Norman O. Brown, regarding his book Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)  

Mike Connor, at Brown's funeral, commenting on Brown and his work on Freud and Marx, stated: "But Brown believed that the payoff was worth the price of sin—namely, that alienation would be overcome, and the return of the repressed completed, rendering problems of sin permanently moot. Life Against Death established Brown, along with his colleague and friend Herbert Marcuse, and later Charles Reich, as an intellectual leader of the New Left …. a Marxist mode of Freudian analysis. Brown's push to resurrect the human body with all its erotic urges freely expressed, resonated with the members of the Human Potential Movement and the undergrads they were influencing in the 60's." (March 23-30, 2005 issue of Metro Santa Cruz)

Remove the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning—by negating the father's/Father's authority—replacing it with the "super-ego"—'justifying' the child's carnal nature—and all you have is a police state, i.e., an oppressed people being ruled by children.

"We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "We know how to influence the ... behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors [our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups] will follow." "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." "'Now that we know how positive reinforcement works [dialoguing opinions to a consensus, i.e., dialoguing our feelings (our carnal desires of the 'moment') to a feeling of oneness ('discovering' through dialogue the common carnal desires that we can all agree on, thereby affirming ourselves, and working together, as one, in fulfilling them, we establish our carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., our "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, i.e., his/His restraints)], and why negative doesn't' [the father's/Father's authority to 1) give us commands and rules which go counter to and therefore restrain our carnal desires of the 'moment,' 2) reward us or bless us when we do what is right and obey, 3) chasten us when we do wrong and disobey, and 4) cast out those who disrespect i.e. who question and/or challenge his/His authority, i.e., who reject his/His restraints]... 'we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled [the manipulated] though they are following a code much more scrupulously [more government regulations and oversight (sight based management)] than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement—there's no restrain and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2019