Key Arguments

• Freud asserts that "The Superego is not just a residuum 71 of the first object-choice of the Id, but also has the significance of a vigorous reaction formation against these choices."
• He specifies its two normative aspects: "Its relationship with the 'Ego' does not exhaust itself in the reminder: You should be so (like father). It also includes the prohibition: You may not be so (like Father), i.e., not do everything he does; some things remain reserved for him."
• He traces these two "faces of the Ego Ideal" to the fact "that the Ego Ideal strove for the repression of the Oedipus Complex, yet its origin is only thanks to such transition."
• He explains that in repressing the Oedipus complex, "The parents, especially the father, become recognized as the obstacle to the achievement of the Oedipus Wish, reinforcing the infantile Ego for this repression performance, in which it erects for itself the same obstacle. It borrows, as it were, the power to do so from the father, and this borrowing is an extraordinarily momentous act."
• He states that "The Superego will preserve the father’s character, and the stronger the Oedipus Complex was, the more accelerated (under the influence of authority, religious doctrine, teaching, reading) the repression achieved, the stricter the Superego later becomes as consciousness, maybe as unconscious guilt over the Ego."
• He notes that the superego’s domination exhibits a "compulsive character, that expresses itself as a categorical imperative, 72" whose source he will later discuss, implying its quasi-Kantian moral force.

Source Quotes

This Ego-alteration keeps its special position, it confronts the other contents of the Ego as the Ego Ideal or Superego. The Superego is not just a residuum 71 of the first object-choice of the Id, but also has the significance of a vigorous reaction formation against these choices. Its relationship with the “Ego” does not exhaust itself in the reminder: You should be so (like father).

The Superego is not just a residuum 71 of the first object-choice of the Id, but also has the significance of a vigorous reaction formation against these choices. Its relationship with the “Ego” does not exhaust itself in the reminder: You should be so (like father). It also includes the prohibition: You may not be so (like Father), i.e., not do everything he does; some things remain reserved for him. The two faces of the Ego Ideal are derived from the fact that the Ego Ideal strove for the repression of the Oedipus Complex, yet its origin is only thanks to such transition.

It also includes the prohibition: You may not be so (like Father), i.e., not do everything he does; some things remain reserved for him. The two faces of the Ego Ideal are derived from the fact that the Ego Ideal strove for the repression of the Oedipus Complex, yet its origin is only thanks to such transition. The repression of the Oedipus Complex is clearly not an easy task.

The parents, especially the father, become recognized as the obstacle to the achievement of the Oedipus Wish, reinforcing the infantile Ego for this repression performance, in which it erects for itself the same obstacle. It borrows, as it were, the power to do so from the father, and this borrowing is an extraordinarily momentous act. The Superego will preserve the father’s character, and the stronger the Oedipus Complex was, the more accelerated (under the influence of authority, religious doctrine, teaching, reading) the repression achieved, the stricter the Superego later becomes as consciousness, maybe as unconscious guilt over the Ego.

It borrows, as it were, the power to do so from the father, and this borrowing is an extraordinarily momentous act. The Superego will preserve the father’s character, and the stronger the Oedipus Complex was, the more accelerated (under the influence of authority, religious doctrine, teaching, reading) the repression achieved, the stricter the Superego later becomes as consciousness, maybe as unconscious guilt over the Ego. From where it derives the power for this domination, the compulsive character, that expresses itself as a categorical imperative, 72 I shall later proffer a guess.

The Superego will preserve the father’s character, and the stronger the Oedipus Complex was, the more accelerated (under the influence of authority, religious doctrine, teaching, reading) the repression achieved, the stricter the Superego later becomes as consciousness, maybe as unconscious guilt over the Ego. From where it derives the power for this domination, the compulsive character, that expresses itself as a categorical imperative, 72 I shall later proffer a guess. Let us cast our eyes again on the described origin of the Superego so we recognize it as the result of two highly significant biological factors, the long childlike helplessness and dependency of a person and the truth of his Oedipus Complex, which we already have tied back to the interruption of libido development through latency, 73 hence the two-fold start of his sexual life.

Key Concepts

• The Superego is not just a residuum 71 of the first object-choice of the Id, but also has the significance of a vigorous reaction formation against these choices.
• Its relationship with the “Ego” does not exhaust itself in the reminder: You should be so (like father). It also includes the prohibition: You may not be so (like Father), i.e., not do everything he does; some things remain reserved for him.
• The two faces of the Ego Ideal are derived from the fact that the Ego Ideal strove for the repression of the Oedipus Complex, yet its origin is only thanks to such transition.
• It borrows, as it were, the power to do so from the father, and this borrowing is an extraordinarily momentous act.
• The Superego will preserve the father’s character, and the stronger the Oedipus Complex was, the more accelerated (under the influence of authority, religious doctrine, teaching, reading) the repression achieved, the stricter the Superego later becomes as consciousness, maybe as unconscious guilt over the Ego.
• the compulsive character, that expresses itself as a categorical imperative, 72

Context

Chapter III section where Freud defines the normative, prohibitive, and reactional nature of the superego in relation to the Oedipus complex and paternal authority.