I've been thinking about that last post, reflecting on that struggle between pure, unfiltered desire, versus self-censoring critique, bordering on condemnation. The Id duking it out with the Superego, yet in the above image, I'm not sure which would which... (I simplistically assume the inflatable weeble punching bag would be the Id. Maybe it's cuz it has that goofy grin on its face, that makes you wanna punch it. Although in my case, I think the Superego mostly wins the battles.)
The Id can be described as the infantile, narcissistic pursuit we have to seek out constant gratification. This is the underlying drive we have for survival, things we crave, like affection, sex, nourishment, intoxicants, etc. It's also been called "the Pleasure Principle," like Janet Jackson sang about in the late 1980s. (I didn't realize how 'deep' she was back then, especially considering that I was in sixth grade when that song came out. I hadn't read Freud for myself yet. That didn't happened until I was in junior high school, and started paging through Freud, Jung, Goethe, Schopenhauer for extra curricular reading... God, I've always been such a dork, haven't I?!?)
In addition to the Id, Freud believed there was what he called "the Superego," which was basically what we'd deem 'the conscience,' or the moral code by which we judge things. It's that little voice inside our head that tells us what the 'right' thing to do is in a given situation. (Or that cartoon angel on our shoulder, while the Id would be the devil, tempting us to satiate all of our secret urges.)
The Superego's self-critic is almost always in direct opposition to those lustful, carnal cravings the Id desires. Freud went on to say that it is the job of "the Ego" to keep those two elements of self in check. The Ego is the rational facet of our psyches that tries to weigh the cost benefit analysis, and proceed with the more moderate decision.
When there is a conflict between what we crave and what we think we 'should' want or do, cognitive dissonance emerges. The tension itself increases depending on how important that subject is to an individual, how drastically different the 'wants' are from the 'should want instead,' and if we can't rationalize away the differences between the two. Often times, the greatest sense of dissonance arises when we are talking about one's own self image, when we have acted in a way that goes against how we generally see ourselves. If we've already made a decision, and are feeling regretful over the course we took, that dissonance tends to surface in the form of guilt, feeling foolish, or even immoral.
The ways in which we can reduce those tensions are to a) change our initial belief, b) change the related decision/action/behavior contrary to that initial belief, or c) rationalize away the difference between the belief and the resulting action. But if that internalized conflict is not resolved swiftly, a feeling of anxiety usually begins to set in. Freud categorized three basic types of anxiety: reality (based on real or possible event), neurotic (based on a fear that we have no control – or metaphorically, that our Id will take over), and morality (based on a fear that we've violated our moral code – which tends to bring up guilt or shame).
Theoretically it seems easy enough to make a shift in our thoughts or behaviors, but many times it can be a bigger task than we could imagine, or even feel absolutely excruciating. That uncomfortable emotional space of dissonance can often trigger our unconscious defense mechanisms. Freud believed that there were many ways that defense mechanisms could manifest (as cited by changingminds.org):
- Denial: claiming/believing that what is true to be actually false.
- Displacement: redirecting emotions to a substitute target.
- Intellectualization: taking an objective viewpoint.
- Projection: attributing uncomfortable feelings to others.
- Rationalization: creating false but credible justifications.
- Reaction Formation: overacting in the opposite way to the fear.
- Regression: going back to acting as a child.
- Repression: pushing uncomfortable thoughts into the subconscious.
- Sublimation: redirecting 'wrong' urges into socially acceptable actions.
Huh, that's a lot of 'schtuff' to wade through... So, is there anything left that Freud didn't cover?!? I feel like this is just one big check list, like "Yep, I do that – ya, that one, too... Ooooh, and that one should probably be on my list, even though I wish it wasn't." Oooof! Some food for thought, egh?
When I look closely at this list, and the ideas mentioned above, I see that (based purely on a Freudian analysis of my current status) I've got some stuff to work out. (Of course there have been a zillion more theories and practitioners that have come and gone since then, so I'm not sure why I am fixating on Freud alone... Do I need to over-analyze my attraction to Freud right now? Some dumb ass meta-narrative?!? But anyway...)
It all comes down to this: Even when we recognize these patterns – when we can identify, quantify, and understand the roots of our issues – what does it take to change the direction of our lives? *Knowing* is not enough. There has to be a catalyst, an epiphany, that realization calling us to a higher plane of knowledge. Enlightenment seems too strong of a word here, but along those lines. A call to action, a motivation to engender this new refined understanding. But I feel stuck, not able to fully realize my greatest potential. There is a catch, but while trying to free myself from that snag, I have seemingly gotten myself further entangled, tripping on my own rip cord.
I had a Latin teacher in high school that used to say: "It's not freedom from, but rather, freedom to ___." I think I am finally understanding the gravity of that sentiment. Unfortunately, I still don't feel free quite yet. (sigh~)
No comments:
Post a Comment