ABSTRACT
Sigmund Freud's own characterization of resistance highlights the seemingly paradoxical nature of resistance, since it is the ego that both resists and remains ignorant of the repressed. The unity of the ego requires careful consideration and Gill suggests that the paradoxical nature of resistance and the ego led Freud, in part, to develop the structural theory in place of the topographic theory. The ongoing interplay between the repressed and the repressing forces is not restricted to Freud's writings and constitutes a basis for similar accounts of repression in post-Freudian thinking. Secondary repression is actively cognitive and aims must either be perceived as threatening in their own right, or perceived to be similar enough to the primary repressed aim to be evaluated as threatening. While Freud discusses repression within the context of unsatisfied impulses forcing themselves into consciousness, the problem involving a subject both knowing and not knowing a given state of affairs is found in cases of anosognosia.
