Critical Evaluation of Freud as a Theorist and His Theory of Personality - Research Paper Example

Critical Evaluation of Freud as a Theorist and his Theory of Personality: A Comparative Approach In Freudian theory of personality, mind is considered as an individual entity that develops different components, such as Id, Ego and Superego, of personality through bodily feelings and longings that are core features of the Id. Though in many cases Freud’s approach to mind is complementary to neurobiological concept of personality and mind, the dichotomy exists in the fact that Freud (1916) skips the physiological function of human brain. But Freudian theory of personality and mind is, to a great extent, complementary to the behavioral theory. The space-time matrix of the Freudian dream clearly reflects that mind is the part of human being in which body is the spatial restriction and limitation of human mind. Obviously mind can go beyond this limitation through his capability of imagination. In the book, “Studies on Hysteria” Freud and Breuer (1893) recognize the physicality and bodily experience as a contribution to the development of personality. But this approach of Freud and Breuer (1893) to body and mind, though it resembles to that of Damasio’s (1992), differs from the neurobiological approach on the ground that though both mind and personality are shaped by bodily feeling, Freud and Breuer’s (1895; 1895) concept of mind does not acknowledge the role of the organic function of human brain to the development of mind. According to them the physical feelings like trauma are stored in human mind first in the form of memory of a foreign entity and then in the form of an agent that determines his future functions of body and mind. Critical Evaluation of Freud as a Theorist and his Theory of Personality: A Comparative Approach Introduction Freud’s theory of personality primarily evolves from his approach to the concept of mind. As a theorist, Freud (1916) crucially depends on the structural existence of human mind that is more or less detached from physiological existence of human being. Irrespective of the relationship of mind with human body, the physical existence, Freud’s “mind” closely follows a structural pattern that effectively explains the different questions -regarding the relationship of mind with various behavioral pattern of a person- of the psychoanalysts of his age. In comparison with the German Philosopher Mauss’s collective notion of “person” which changes from time to time and society to society, Freud’s concept of ‘person’ appears to be an intact one that is supposed to function universally (Ziegler, 2002, p. 81). But Freud’s theory of personality that exclusively revolves around a person’s body apparently fails to explain the relationship between body and mind that was one of the recurring question in various writings’ of the scholars of the 19th century. Hence, Cartesian concept of “body and mind” comes forward with the “dual existence” with body and mind (Pope, 2007, p. 38). This duality of the Cartesian concept of personality is greatly challenged by Antonio Damasio (1992). Indeed Damasio’s (1992) concept of human existence puts emphasis on the role of the physicality of human being in shaping human mind considering that human existence is inseparably psycho-physical. Damasio’s concept of “person” is very much similar to Freud’s theory of personality. Yet Damasio’s concept is different from Freud’s in the sense that the role of Freud’s “human physicality” is a secondary one that is meant to convey the abstract feelings and sensations to human mind to shape it accordingly (Pope, 2007, p. 188). Whether it is Damasio’s theory of “person” or Cartesian dual concept of “body and mind”, Freudian concept of “mind” has played a significant role in the overall development of these theories in this field. A Brief Overview of Freud’s Psychodynamics: “Id”, “Ego” and “Superego” Some of the terminologies that have been used in this paper need to be clarified in order to avoid confusion. According to Freudian theory of personality, when the term “mind” denotes a structural abstract entity, the “person” refers to the psychophysical existence of human being. But whereas in behavioral and biological theories, “personality” refers more likely to the codes and moulds of interaction of a person with his surroundings, in Freudian terminology the term bears a meaning that is closely related to the concept of ‘mind’ in general (Pope, 2007, p. 38). Freud’s theory personality infers that human personality is, in the first place, determined by the psychodynamics of ‘mind’: Id, ego and superego. At the same time, these constituents -id, ego and superego- together constitute the basic structure of mind. Often they are mistaken for the personality structure of a man. But indeed the interactions among these three constituents are revealed in an individual’s personality (Ziegler, 2002, p. 88). According Freud (1916), the Id is the most primitive part of human mind that continually urges a human being to follow the pleasure principles. It is the part of human personality that exists from the birth of a child. This component of personality is totally unconscious and instinctive. It is the source of all psychic energies that continually strives for the immediate fulfillment of physical hungers and desires (Cherry, 2006, p. 4). In case, these desires are not fulfilled, it gives a rise to tension, anxiety and anger. Also if the fulfillment of desires is not possible, Id creates a graphic substitution of the desired object in mind. Now the ego is the part of personality that works to fulfill the needs of the Id in a more realistic way. According to Freud (1916), the ego evolves from the failure of id to fulfill a desire. If the id fails to fulfill any desires immediately, it starts to grow the ego in order to satisfy the need in some other practical way. The ego ensures that the desires of the Id are expressed in an acceptable manner. Indeed the ego operates on the basis of reality principles that are responsible “to weight the costs and benefits of an action before deciding to act upon or abandon impulses” (Cherry, 2006, p. 4). Again Freud (1916) notes that the ego remains active in all the three levels of mind: the conscious, the preconscious and the unconscious mind. The final development of personality is the superego that is sum-total of all the moral standards and ideals. In fact, the superego develops from the interactions of the Id and the ego with the surroundings. Also the superego not only develops moral standards from the interactions between the Id and the ego, but also it absorbs them from the surroundings. The part of the superego that develops from the conditions set by the ego for the long term benefit of the Id is the conscience. The conscience grows as a result of the universalized rules set by the internal calculation of the ego. In cases, this calculation may be influenced by external determinants such rules of society, family, etc. Again, the ego-ideal part of the superego develops by directly absorbing the morals and ideals from the surrounding. Essentially the superego evolves from the sense of a universal and collective condition of long-term fulfillment of the desires of the Id. This condition of the fulfillment of desires emerges as an agreement among the members of a society. The superego tries to suppress all the unacceptable desires of the Id and the ego on the ground that the fulfillment of these unacceptable desires may lead to impede the long-term fulfillment of other desires. Comparative Evaluation of Freudian “Person” with Mauss’ and Corin’s Collective “Person”: His Influence on the Behavioral Theory Freud’s psychodynamic theory of “personality” has a significant influence on the development of the behavioral approach to human personality. In the first place, Freud’s psychoanalytical theory provides the basis for the behavioral theory of personality. The first and foremost condition of behavioral theory is the interaction of the person with his surrounding. In Freud’s theory also the two components of personality: the ego and the superego develop from the interactions of the id with the surrounding in which the person lives (Szasz, 1990, p. 49). Though behavioral of personality primarily focuses on the interactions of the individuals with the environment which they are attached to, the psychodynamics of Freud’s theory tend to shape the patterns of influence of the environment on the individual’s personality. For example, according to the behaviorist philosopher Mauss (1988), individual is the outcome of a man’s interactions with his society and culture, whereas the personality of Freud’s individual is driven by a set of psychodynamics. Consequently Mauss’s individual personality constantly undergoes changes with the transformations of the determinants in the individual’s surrounding, as he says, “the notion of the ‘person’ was still to undergo a further transformation to become what it has become over less than one and a half centuries, the category of self” (Mauss, 1988, p. 20). Though Mauss’s “person” is transformational and context-related, the unalterable foundation of this person is essentially established on Freudian psychodynamics. Mauss (1988) views it as something “natural, clearly determined in the depth of [human] consciousness” (p. 38). This “depth of consciousness” is presumably defined as the sum-total of Id, ego and superego in Freud’s theory of personality (Szasz, 1990, p. 49). The stages of the development of an individual’s personality fundamentally reflect Freud’s psychological structure of mind in the following quotation of Mauss: From a simple masquerade to the mask, from a ‘role’… to a ‘person’…, to a name, to an individual; from the latter to a being metaphysical and moral value; from a moral consciousness to a sacred being; from the latter to a fundamental form of thought and action- the course is accomplished. (Mauss, 1988, p. 22) Another behaviorist scholar, Corin (1932) acknowledges that individual and person are to be perceived as two different concepts. In Corin’s view individual personality is to be perceived from both a biological and objective perspective as an entity that “encompasses broader human reality of participation, sociality, communion, and depends on a mythical basis” (Corin, 1932, p. 85). Indeed Corin as well as a number of other behaviorist psychoanalysts has attempted to view the personality traits of an ‘Individual’ or “person” are scrutinize from Freud’s unconscious region of human mind. For an example Corin (1932) examines the interplay of the conscious and unconscious mind to the growth of the Melanesian ‘person’. He notes that this growth of the Melanesian person is rooted in the conflicts of the unconscious region of mind that has to confront the traditional mythical world of the Melanesian society. In this regard, Corin (1932) says that the developmental procedure of a Melanesian ‘person’ is “grounded in the unconscious debate in the person…is foreshadowed by the positioning of heroes or heroines who have rejected the constraints of their social role” (Corin, 1932, p. 85). Complementary Role of Freud’s Dream-Image and Phrenology of Personality Freud (1916) never explicitly mentions that the Id regulates and control human being’s bodily function. Neither has he said that the body-functions influence the mind or personality. But simply he mentions that body works in order to satisfy the pleasure principles of the Id and the reality principles of the ego. The Id is the inherent predisposition of human personality to maximize the pleasure factors and minimize the uncomfortable ones. Though Freud (1916) does not acknowledge the organic function of brain, the instinctive urges of the Id necessarily refers to a remote relationship with the inborn biological functioning of human body and brain. If the body is in need of food, the biological functioning of body seeks an instant relief. This functioning of the brain that seeks instant fulfillment of the pleasure factors is considered by Freud (1916) as the Id. But this Id remains suppressed by the Ego and the Superego in the afterward development of the personality as well as psyche. What Damasio (1992) regards as “the ability to display images internally and to order those images in a process called thought” (p. 48) is marked by Freud (1916) as the conscious and preconscious stages of mind. In fact Damasio (1992) notes that the preconscious state of mind from which the brain recalls the images is the storing system of brain. Freud’s description of dream is greatly related to his concept of “mind”. Indeed the dream-images of Freud are similar, to a great extent, to Damasio’s sensory image. According to Freud (1916), dreams are the craving and disturbing demonstrations of the Id that remains covered up by the ego and the superego. In this regard Freud (1916) says, “We should not have dreamed if some disturbing element had not come into play during our sleep, and the dream is the reaction against this disturbance” (p. 38). When the wants and needs of the Id become suppressed by the Ego and the Superego, the Id in the preconscious state of mind finds its way out of the censors of the Ego and the Superego during the sleep through the compromise-formation, as Freud (1916) notes, The dream had to assume such a form as would accommodate both the expressions of self-depreciation and exaggerated self-glorification in the same material. This compromise-formation resulted in an ambiguous dream-content. (p.144) But dreams as hysterical manifestations of personality differ from the dreams in the normal state of mind. The traumatic experience, whether it is physical or psychological, creates a dream image of the trauma in the unconscious area of the mind. However the Id exerts significant effort to prepare a solution for the trauma. If the Id fails, the superego tries to suppress it, the image of the trauma is subsumed in the unconscious area of mind that often manifests itself at the conscious area of mind. Hence Freud’s dream images are the demonstrations of the memories of the preconscious and unconscious mind, as Freud (1916) says, “Dream-images for the most part contain that of which one has been thinking in the waking state” (p. 5). As to the fact how the sensory images are integrated into the conscious mind, Damasio (1992) claims that the images are represented and reproduced in the sensory cortices of the brain and then these “topographically organized” images are embodied into the consciousness (p. 99). Indeed Freud’s “thinking in the waking state” can be considered as the representation process of human brain. When Damasio (1992) says that images are the staffs of consciousness, these images, according to Freud (1916), are those that are formed due to thinking during the waking sate of a human being (p. 46). Freud and Breuer’s (1895) study of Anna-case reflects the state of a mind that, to a great extent, fit with Damasio’s neurobiological concept of personality. Freud and Breuer (1895) find the pathogenesis of Anna’s case to be a hallucination of a snake in her waking dream (Freud & Breuer, 1895, p. 38). If scrutinized from Damasio’s neurobiological perspective, Anna’s paralysis can be viewed as the chaotic state of motor drive. Conclusion Though in many cases Freud’s approach to mind is complementary to neurobiological concept of personality and mind, the dichotomy exists in the fact that Freud skips the physiological function of human brain. But Freudian theory of personality and mind is, to a great extent, complementary to the behavioral theory. The neurobiological concept of mind primarily starts with the reception of the sensory inputs by brain and memory consists of these inputs along the processing of brain’s inborn capability. Some of the images are formed depending on the images formed by the sensory input. These images assist a human being to predict the future and to determine his socio-cultural role in the society. Thus Damasio’s concept of mind implicates socio-cultural existence of human being. For Freud (1916), the images play a crucial role in the formation of the psyche. But the difference between Freud’s and Damasio’s is that Freud’s images are considered to be the part of human psyche, whereas Damasio’s is for the storing system of brain. It is evident in Freud’s consideration of physical trauma. According to him, traumatic experience first interacts with the conscious region of mind as foreign body, which in the later course of development turns into an agent to remain hyperactive, as he says, “We must assume that the physical trauma –more precisely the memory of the trauma- acts likes a foreign body which long after its entry must continue to be regarded as an agent that is at work” (Freud, 1916, p. 6). References Breuer, J. and Freud, S. (1893). On the Physical Mechanism of Hysterical Phenomena: Preliminary Communication. Studies on Hysteria, translated by James Strachey, 75-186. Breuer, J. and Freud, S. (1895). Case Histories, Studies on Hysteria, translated by James Strachey, 23-74. Cherry, K. (2006). The Id, Ego and Superego. Psychology. Retrieved November 3, 2010, from the About.com from http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/personalityelem.htm Corin, E. (1932). Refiguring the person: the dynamics of affects and symbols in an African spirit possession cult. Bodies and Person. Ed. Michael Lambek and Andrew Strathern, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Damasio, A. (1992). Descartes’ Error, London: Penguin Books. Freud, S. (1916). The Interpretation of Dreams. 1900, 20 Oct. 2010 Mauss, M. (1988). A Category of Human Mind: the Notion of Person; the Notion of Self. The category of the Person. Edited by Michael Carrithers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Pope, D. C. (2007). Somatic Computationalism: Damasio’s Clever Error, Mississippi: State University. Szasz, T. (1990). Anti-Freud: Karl Krauss criticism of psychoanalysis and psychiatry. NY: Syracuse University. Ziegler, D. J. (2002). Freud, Rogers and Ellis: A comparative theoretical analysis. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive Behavior Therapy. 20(2), 75-91 Read More