Freud's classification of the id, ego and superego is quite insightful. People do not have a fixed nature. Human nature is transparent. The so-called goodness and evil are merely variations at the level of consciousness. There is no eternal goodness, nor is there eternal evil. The animalistic aspects of human nature, such as sexual desires, competition, and overeating, all require restraint. Uncontrolled animalistic behaviors can lead one into chaos. People need to develop meaningful human nature through the restraint of animal instincts. The two complement each other.But in reality, the concept of the self in humans is merely an illusion. There is never a true self. The so-called concept of "myself" is merely the effect of emotions and consciousness. When you remove the influence of consciousness and emotions, the remaining nature is the sole truth.
I‘m only roughly familiar with Freud‘s theory, but I think there’s sone truth to it. The way I see it humans are social animals, we have a hardwired need for relationships and we have empathy.
For society to work, individuals need to keep their most primal and purely egoistic instincts (id) in check. In turn, a group of people can accomplish more for all members than a human on their own.
The superego, as I understand it, is a combination of our need for human connection, empathy, our longing for societal approval and our ability to grasp the possible consequences of pur actions.
I‘m only roughly familiar with Freud‘s theory, but I think there’s sone truth to it. The way I see it humans are social animals, we have a hardwired need for relationships and we have empathy.
For society to work, individuals need to keep their most primal and purely egoistic instincts (id) in check. In turn, a group of people can accomplish more for all members than a human on their own.
The superego, as I understand it, is a combination of our need for human connection, empathy, our longing for societal approval and our ability to grasp the possible consequences of pur actions.
It's an interesting topic @Chailleach and it's obvious you've done your research. I'm unfortunately not yet too familiar with Freud other than him investigating the unconscious. I'll search more information about him, I'm eager to have a discussion about this topic.
@PeterPositiv I'm curious what you have to say about sociopaths in this context who don't feel any empathy? Do you think they have a certain fault in their brains? Do they need to adjust and learn how to behave socially acceptable, without being able to feel empathy?
Definitely not my area of expertise, I did, like, five minutes if research on this, so people with more knowledge, please correct me. Sociopathy and associated disorders can, as far as I understand, be caused by genetic factors and having to survive in a socially hostile environment. Part of it is not learning empathy in early years.
In Freud‘s terms the superego of affected persons is weaker, they lack empathy and and are impulsive.
Research suggest that affected persons can learn more social behaviour.
So they seem to be able to learn socially acceptable behaviour, but I don’t know to what degree it is possible to gain empathy in adulthood.
I think psychopaths are fairly good at imitating empathy and behaving socially, purely based on observation and rational thought.
On the other hand: What is politeness other than doing things because they are expected of us, not because we want to? (I have some more thoughts on this, but going to leave it at this for now)
Psychopathy is caused by nature (genetics), while sociopathy is the result of a combination of nature, nurturing, and the environment. Psychopathy is related to the physiological defects that result from the lack of development of the part, which is related to responsibility, control, and emotions of the mind while sociopathy tends to be a combination of childhood trauma, emotional abuse, and abnormal socialization, where social disease appears to have been learned from the surrounding environment rather than being innate or inherited as in the case of psychopathy.
On a very basic level, sociopathy is not fundamentally a matter of psychology – it is a matter of sociology with vast and significant consequences in regards to the organization of individuals in each division of human undertaking. Social intelligence is the result of a combination of factors and skills, most notably: compassion, empathy, social interest, social performance, social awareness, and high sensitivity to emotional states of others. In brief, they can't imitate any social intelligence ; because the most prominent qualities of his inability to compassion and sympathy are two essential elements in the formation of social intelligence. However, he may have a low level of emotional intelligence due to his lies and recklessness. His trick and denial will not last long, especially in light of his inability to continue in social relations.
I recently concluded a competition and I’m delighted to see you taking the time to seriously engage with my questions. The initial forum post "Who am I?" presented a rather superficial articulation of this thought system due to space constraints. Actually, I can be seen as Freud's adversary—that's how a friend of mine described me. However, he said I defeated Freud because I’m alive, and he is dead. Therefore, life represents infinite possibility. Life itself is the synthesis of the Primordial Self ('Ben Wo'), the Conscious Self ('Zi Wo'), and the Transcendent Self ('Chao Wo') (My theory merely borrows Freud's terminology; it is not an interpretation of his original meaning).
What is the Primordial Self ('id')? Exactly what its name implies. A person's inherent animalistic nature. Desires like reproduction, eating, and excreting are all part of the Primordial Self. Its most prominent characteristic is "I want to survive," and survival is the driving force behind most people's actions.
The Conscious Self ('ego') is conscious activity built upon the foundation of the Primordial Self. It attributes the characteristics of the Transcendent Self to the Primordial Self. What is conscious activity? It's a thought generated under the influence of one's environment and personal traits. For example, I have a sensitive stomach, so when I see cold food, my reaction is "I can't eat that, or I'll definitely vomit." This thought is conscious activity. Social relationships, religious beliefs, joy, anger, sorrow, and happiness are all results of the interaction between the Conscious Self and the Primordial Self. @PeterPositiv That is your explanation of the superego. I applied this explanation to the ego.
The Transcendent Self ('superego') is a term tinged with metaphysical nuance. The essence of this world is contradiction—life and death, increase and decrease, purity and impurity. The moment you are born signifies your march toward extinction; the beginning of your success signifies your path to decline... This is a state of duality (binary opposition). And the Conscious Self and Primordial Self are both caught within this duality.
If someone slaps you, you feel anger. But after a year, will you still be angry? The anger caused by being slapped no longer exists. Therefore, this is a transformation from birth to death (anger arises, anger ceases). Thus, the Conscious Self and Primordial Self are trapped in duality.
But the Transcendent Self is not. The Transcendent Self is not trapped in duality.
I know what you're probably thinking—when I say "The Transcendent Self is not trapped in duality," the Transcendent Self is already falling into a form of duality by asserting "I am not duality." My explanation for this is: because we live in the material world, whenever I express something that exists above the material world in material terms, this higher reality, when projected onto our world, inevitably appears in the form of duality in its projected shadow—which is my verbal expression. Therefore, in summary: the Conscious Self and Primordial Self are trapped in duality, while the Transcendent Self has transcended duality.
@-Kiki-Why are there individuals with innate antisocial personality? I think, explanations based only on the Conscious Self and Primordial Self might point to childhood trauma or similar factors. This is indeed a valid explanation. However, I believe another portion of the antisocial population is shaped by the Transcendent Self. Even if such a person is born into a privileged household, enjoys a coddled upbringing, and receives boundless affection, if their Transcendent Self embodies an ultimate form of evil, they will still develop an antisocial personality. Fortunately, the Transcendent Self of most people lacks a distinct good or evil attribute—most are neutral. Precisely because of this, the environment of those whose Transcendent Self is neutral becomes crucially important. Because when the Transcendent Self cannot exert its influence on the material world, the decisive factors become the Conscious Self and Primordial Self—and these are deeply intertwined with one's environment.
Do you mean Transcendent Self ('superego'), differs human being from animals?